research questions about alternative energy sources

This page has been archived and is no longer updated

Sponsorship

Alternative energy.

Nearly every country in the world today concedes that the age of sourcing energy from fossil fuels — chiefly crude oil and coal — is waning. Not only is there a finite amount of fossil fuel reserves in the Earth, but the environmental (and even political) cost of using these reserves is higher than most countries are willing to bear. As a result, the search for energy derived from alternative sources — including geothermal, nuclear, solar, wind, and hydroelectric technologies — has taken on enormous importance in political and scientific circles. Some countries have made significant strides toward converting their energy bases from fossil fuels to renewable energies; for example, Denmark which supplied more than 95% of its national energy from fossil fuels in the early 1970s, now supplies more than 30% from wind and other renewable sources. Many other nations, including the United States and China, are still largely fossil-fuel based, but are awakening to the need to make national-level investments in alternative energy innovations that could transform their economies in the near future. The next twenty years may well bring a massive reinvention of the world's approach to energy. There are many questions that must be answered and hundreds of paths that can be followed in the quest to move beyond fossil fuels. Should the world's governments emphasize energy efficiency strategies that reduce the demand for fossil fuels by reducing energy consumption? One example of this approach is the use of "smart grids" that more effectively regulate the flow of energy from utility companies to homes and businesses. Or should governments emphasize the cultivation of new energy sources such as wind or geothermal power? Or a combination of the two? Should the cars of the future run on fuel cells, electricity, plant-based fuels . . . or fossil fuels? In the alternative energy debate, there are no simple answers. Forming a rich understanding of the many points of view in this dialogue is essential to developing a thoughtful, balanced position. In this Spotlight, we provide a guided tour through the quest for alternative energies. What are the various kinds of energies being explored, and what are their pros and cons? How are traditional energy companies — including oil and gas companies and utilities — reacting to the challenge? How can cultivation of alternative energies spur economic growth? We hope your exploration of the resources we've gathered here to answer these questions will only be the beginning of a lifelong engagement with one of the most important issues of our time.

Image: NASA.

Email your Friend

What is alternative energy.

An overview of alternative energy

Watch this video summary of the most promising sources of alternative energy.

The quest for smart grids

See how smart grids can make energy delivery in California more efficient.

What is the future of energy?

Scientific American takes a look forward at future sources and uses of energy.

Economics of energy use and regulation

Energy needs and its sources

This graphic shows the relative levels of production and consumption of energy among the nations with the largest energy demands.

The costs and benefits of cap-and-trade

A commitment to alternative energy requires a reduction in fossil fuel use. How can we effectively legislate this to benefit both business and the environment?

Growing biofuels means growing less food

Can cultivating biofuel resources affect other agriculture needs? How does it change our use of corn products and affect world hunger?

Biofuel: Growing fuel rather than digging for it

Watch how corn and other abundant food sources in the western hemisphere support renewable power.

Solar: Harnessing the sun

The Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs describes solar energy's impact on national energy consumption.

Nuclear: A global initiative for nuclear energy

Researchers in France are building both the world's first nuclear fusion plant and support for atomic energy.

Geothermal: A not-so-cold power source in Iceland

Iceland sits atop a valuable subterranean energy source that is hot enough to power its national future.

Wave: How the ocean could power the land

The strong kinetic energy in ocean currents is a renewable resource. See how scientists capture it.

Wind: Using wind to help power the US

The US Department of Energy has committed to putting wind behind 20% of the nation's electrical supply by 2030.

Energy provider efforts

Electricity supply in Africa

Power plants and renewable energy projects are proliferating across sub-Saharan Africa.

BP and alternative energy

Discover the new division of BP that is dedicated to investment in solar, biofuel, wind, hydrogen power, and carbon capture technologies.

ExxonMobil emissions reduction efforts

Learn how the oil company ExxonMobil is funding emissions reduction efforts.

© 2014 Nature Education

• Press Room |
• Terms of Use |
• Privacy Notice |

• Original article
• Open access
• Published: 11 September 2019

A systematic approach for assessment of renewable energy using analytic hierarchy process

• Gerçek Budak 1 ,
• Xin Chen 1 ,
• Serdar Celik 1 &
• Berk Ozturk 1  

Energy, Sustainability and Society volume  9 , Article number:  37 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

16k Accesses

26 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Cities around the world face a great challenge in establishing a long-term strategy for the development of energy alternatives. Previous research tried to identify renewable energy across many different cities. Because each city has unique characteristics in terms of geographic and environmental conditions, population, economic development, and social and political environment, the most sustainable energy source for one city might be the least sustainable for another.

This research develops and implements a systematic approach to assess renewable energy and identify the energy alternatives for a city using the analytic hierarchy process. The methodology integrates experts’ input and data analytics and helps decision-makers form long-term strategies for renewable energy development.

The decision support system is applied to three cities, Chengdu in China, Eskisehir in Turkey, and Chicago in the United States of America. Results show that improving energy efficiency and development of solar and wind energy are the most preferred energy alternatives whereas nuclear and hydroelectric are the least preferred energy alternatives for these three cities.

Conclusions

The results of this study are in line with decades of research and development in energy alternatives and show a clear direction for the future development of energy alternatives around the world. There are differences in the rankings of energy alternatives for different cities, indicating that it is necessary to apply the decision support system developed in this study to help form customized energy strategies for cities with unique characteristics.

Motivation, challenges, and objective

As energy demand increases over time in many places, countries around the world and local governments diversify investment in a variety of energy sources to meet the demand [ 1 ]. Fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas are reliable energy sources, but are not sustainable and cause significant and irreversible damage to the environment in the long term in addition to their immediate damage such as fine dust emissions due to burning oil and mercury emissions caused by coal combustion. Renewable energy alternatives such as solar and wind are widely available and may be explored to meet part of the demand. In addition, improving the energy efficiency of existing applications is a cost-effective way to help meet the demand without significant increase in energy production [ 2 ].

Development of energy alternatives to fossil fuels faces a number of challenges [ 3 ]. First, several alternatives such as nuclear, biomass, solar, wind, and hydroelectric are available. A municipality has limited resources and cannot invest in all alternatives simultaneously and equally [ 1 ]. It is difficult to predict which energy alternatives will be most beneficial in the long term and determine which alternatives should be invested and the amount of investment. Secondly, the development of energy alternatives depends on many factors such as geographic conditions, population, societal needs, and politics. An energy alternative that is well suited for one city may be the worst choice for another city. Thirdly, there are many criteria such as cost and security that dictate the selection of energy alternatives. Which criteria should be included in the decision process for comparing energy alternatives and how to weigh different criteria need to be analyzed.

This study applies the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and develops a systematic approach and a decision support system to assess energy alternatives and help municipalities select the most suitable alternatives. The methodology is implemented to analyze energy alternatives for three cities representing Asia, Europe, and North America. Results show that the energy alternatives chosen by the decision support system are reasonable and well justified. The AHP may be used to assess energy alternatives for other cities by computing total scores and rankings of alternatives using expert input. The methodology developed in this study may be adapted to general multi-criteria decision-making problems involving expert input.

Literature review

Renewable energy has become an inseparable part of sustainable economic development, and numerous studies were conducted to determine the investment strategies in renewable energy. Lee and Zhong [ 3 ] presented a study on developing a holistic strategy for renewable energy investment, which includes three steps of analyzing (a) economics and renewable energy policies, (b) renewable energy fields that exhibit more attractive investment opportunities, and (c) most promising renewable energy technologies for prospective investors. Aguilar and Cai [ 4 ] investigated the likelihood of opportunities for renewable energy private investments in the USA. The analysis showed that solar and wind energy was ranked at the top while grass and wood-based energy alternatives were at the bottom of the alternatives list.

Outside of the USA, Zhang et al. [ 5 ] studied a real options model for solar energy investment in China. The model investigated uncertain factors, including non-renewable energy cost, the market price of electricity, and CO 2 costs, and evaluated the investment value and optimum timing for solar farm applications in China. It was found that increased level of subsidy, stabilized market, and promoting technological developments were major factors in leveraging investment. Simsek and Simsek [ 6 ] investigated the incentives for renewable energy in Turkey. It was stated that the deregulation of the electricity market and improved renewable energy legislations had encouraged growth in renewable energy investment and projects within the past few years. Kılkış [ 7 , 8 ] developed a composite index to evaluate energy and environment systems in Mediterranean and Southeast European cities. Mattiussi et al. [ 9 ] developed a multi-objective optimization model and used the AHP to choose the most sustainable energy supply in Australia.

Romero et al. [ 10 ] studied the European Union (EU) plans for renewable energy. The research suggested that the recent success in the increase in renewable energy investment and installations was due to the public financial incentives. Spain was selected as a case study. Renewable options including wind, solar-thermal, photovoltaic, and biomass were studied. Financial support systems in Spain were also identified in the study. Another study on the European side was conducted by Bulavskaya and Reynès [ 11 ]. This study focused on macroeconomics and job creation potential of renewable energy technologies in the Netherlands. It was predicted that 0.85% of gross domestic product (GDP) would come from renewable energy applications by 2030. It was also estimated that 50,000 new full-time jobs would become available by then.

The research was conducted previously to compare and select renewable energy. Many municipalities, especially medium to large-size cities, however, face the challenge of how to identify the most suitable energy sources that are sustainable and cost-effective. There is a gap between the state-of-the-art research in renewable energy and how to customize the research outcome for the development and implementation of renewable energy in cities around the world. Complex decisions about renewable energy often involve intangible and implicit information, which may be quantified using tangible and explicit values to help make informed decisions [ 12 ]. The AHP is a measurement technique that performs pairwise comparisons of decision criteria and rank decision alternatives using expert knowledge. The AHP identifies inconsistencies in experts’ input through consistency check; inconsistent expert input is excluded from analysis of the decision problem to ensure the validity of expert knowledge. In addition to inconsistencies, scaling of experts’ assessment of decision alternatives for different criteria affects decision-making and its outcome [ 13 ]. The AHP enables experts to adjust their assessment through a reaffirmation process and fine-tune their assessment for unbiased decision-making.

Since the AHP was first developed in 1980s, it has been applied to many applications for decision-making [ 14 ]. Several studies focused on using the AHP for the planning of renewable and sustainable energy (e.g., [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]). In the context of renewable energy, various studies targeted specific energy sources. For example, Sindhu et al. [ 25 ] prioritized challenges in the growth of solar energy in India using the AHP. Uyan [ 26 ] used the AHP to select solar farm sites in Turkey. Papalexandrou et al. [ 27 ] used the AHP to compare biofuels and fossil fuels and determine which types of biofuel should be chosen. Okello et al. [ 28 ] used the AHP to evaluate bioenergy alternatives in Uganda. Choudhary and Shankar [ 29 ] discussed how the AHP could be used to select thermal power plant locations in India.

In addition to planning of renewable energy and selection of specific renewable energy sources, the AHP was widely used in energy applications and beyond. For example, several studies focused on green supply chains and used the AHP to help select suppliers [ 30 ], seaports [ 31 ], and green electricity [ 32 ]. Other studies used the AHP to select wind observation station locations [ 33 ], allocate energy research and development resources [ 34 ], and compare water heating systems [ 35 ]. While there has been substantial research on renewable energy planning and energy source selection using the AHP, few studies combined these two directions and applied them to various geographical regions to determine the long-term energy strategies in these regions. Municipalities have unique characteristics, including natural resources, environmental conditions, population, industry activities, politics, and others, and experience different short-term and long-term trends of how these characteristics might evolve. The planning of energy production involves several actors (e.g., policy-makers and service providers) at different scales (e.g., local, regional, and national). A systematic approach is needed to enable a municipality to design a strategy for effectively and efficiently exploring energy alternatives.

The novelty of this article is twofold. First, this study integrates energy planning and energy source selection. Previous research focused on either the planning of a specific energy source such as wind or solar, or the selection of energy sources. This article integrates both and develops a systematic approach for long-term energy planning and selection of sustainable energy sources. Secondly, this study applies the AHP to help energy planning and selection of renewable energy for specific cities based on their unique characteristics. Previous research developed general methodologies for energy planning or selection of energy sources; these methodologies were not customized for municipalities and recommendations were often disconnected from realities.

Methodology

Many methods and multi-criteria decision-making approaches such as the AHP, analytic network process (ANP), and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR), and ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité (ELECTRE) were developed to rank alternatives. The main contribution of this study is a systematic approach embedded in a decision support system that uses the AHP to rank different energy alternatives according to multiple criteria and determines the appropriate energy alternatives for a particular city. Decision-makers and stakeholders may use the outcome of the decision support system developed in this study to make informed decisions about the investment and implementation of energy alternatives for a city. Two sets of data, including weights for the assessment criteria and performance scores of energy alternatives for criteria, are collected, normalized, and analyzed in this study. Weights for criteria are determined through a survey of experts across multiple disciplines and performance scores are obtained through in-depth face-to-face interviews with energy domain experts who have intimate knowledge about cities of interest [ 12 , 13 ].

This study answers a key research question “Which energy alternatives are the most suitable for a city given its location, recourses, population, political environment, and other factors?” The two main steps of this study are to determine (a) weights of criteria for the assessment of energy alternatives, and (b) performance scores of energy alternatives for each criterion and a city of interest. Previous research investigated several aspects in the assessment of renewable energy, including environmental concerns [ 18 ], incentives [ 6 ], investment strategies [ 3 , 4 , 5 ], jobs and economic development [ 11 ], and research development [ 34 ]. These perspectives may be grouped into five main criteria (Table 1 ). These five criteria correspond to four categories, including economy, technology, environment, and society, which were used to assess renewable energy in multi-criteria decision-making in the literature [ 36 ].

The four categories in Table 1 , economy, technology, environment, and society, are the main categories that shape the strategical decisions of renewable energy deployment in cities [ 36 ]. The five assessment criteria in Table 1 are extracted from literature [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 11 , 18 , 34 ] and belong to one or more of the four categories. Table 1 shows the mapping between the five assessment criteria and four assessment categories.

After the five criteria for the assessment of energy alternatives are identified based on literature review, the next step is to determine weights for each criterion using the AHP. The AHP obtains experts’ input through pairwise comparisons of criteria and examines the consistency of comparisons provided by each expert. Consistent input from multiple experts are compiled and used to calculate the weights of criteria. These criteria are then used to assess energy alternatives for a particular city. For each criterion, an expert is presented with multiple energy alternatives and the expert provides a performance score for each alternative for the criterion. The seven energy alternatives assessed in this study are efficiency, solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, nuclear, and hydroelectric. The first alternative, efficiency, indicates that investment may be made to improve energy efficiency of existing energy applications, and this is an investment alternative to other renewable energy. It is important to note that these seven energy alternatives are not mutually exclusive. One or more alternatives may be selected for a particular city depending on available resources. Table 2 summarizes the five criteria and seven alternatives. The expert’s assessment of an alternative for a criterion is a performance score to be recorded in the cell at the intersection of the criterion and alternative in Table 2 .

Two criteria, cost and maximum capacity, are measurable and have units whereas the other three, environmental impact, job creation, and security, are a combination of tangible and intangible factors and are difficult to measure. The AHP solicits experts’ assessment of the performance of energy alternatives for each criterion using a scale of 0–10 (Table 3 ). Suppose an expert is asked to assess the performance of energy alternative X for criterion Y in city Z, the expert answers the question “What would be the performance of X for Y if X is used in Z?” and assigns a score between 0 and 10. A higher score indicates that X performs relatively well in terms of Y if X is used in Z, and a lower score indicates that X might not be a good choice for Z in terms of Y.

Two surveys (questionnaires) are developed using the AHP [ 12 , 37 ] to obtain experts’ assessment. The first survey is used to determine the weights for the five criteria through pairwise comparisons. The survey is sent to multiple experts in the fields of renewable energy and energy applications. Responses from a large number of experts help remove or reduce bias in survey results. The second survey is used to obtain performance scores for different energy alternatives. This survey is completed through interviews with experts who not only are knowledgeable about renewable energy but also have a deep understanding of geographic, social, and environmental characteristics of a particular city. Several interviews may be conducted with the same expert to fine-tune the expert’s assessment and confirm the performance scores. Similar to the first survey, it is also desirable to obtain responses from multiple experts for the second survey. Because the second survey does not involve pairwise comparisons and there are fewer experts who are both knowledgeable about renewable energy and characteristics of a city, one expert for each city is interviewed to complete the second survey.

Figure 1 shows the underlying hierarchical structure of two surveys whose results are used to rank and select renewable energy sources. The ranking of renewable energy may be conducted using a variety of methods such as the TOPSIS and data envelopment analysis (DEA), but the AHP is the most appropriate method for the analysis of problems with hierarchical structures similar to that in Fig. 1 . In addition, the AHP performs better than other methods in obtaining experts’ response and check the consistency of each expert’s response. The AHP may be applied to problems with 7 ± 2 factors [ 38 ]. This study uses five assessment criteria and the AHP is well suited for the analysis of renewable energy in this study.

Hierarchical Structure of Ranking and Selectin of Renewable Energy Sources

Applications of AHP to Chengdu, Eskisehir, and Chicago

Three cities from Asia, Europe, and North America are selected to assess their energy alternatives using the AHP and help these cities develop long-term strategies for the applications of renewable energy. In Asia, Chengdu, a major city located in Western China with a population over 7.8 million, is selected to apply the AHP to assess renewable energy. Chengdu is close to (about 20 miles) the longest river, Yangtze River, in China. This provides Chengdu with great potential of hydroelectric and nuclear energy. The majority of Chengdu’s electricity supply comes from coal. Chengdu does not have any nuclear power plants. One reason to choose China is that China has had nuclear power plants for several decades and has a strategic plan and the technology know-how to build more nuclear power plants.

In Europe, Eskisehir, located in the northwest of Turkey and interconnecting Ankara and other major cities, is selected because Turkey is a fast-developing country with ever-increasing energy demand and Eskisehir in particular faces the challenge of energy shortage. Eskisehir has a great potential of developing solar, wind, and biomass energy and serves as an energy distribution center for the surrounding region [ 39 ]. In addition, low population density and increasing government support make Eskisehir an ideal city for this study. In North America, Chicago, one of the largest and densely populated cities in the USA, is selected for this study. Chicago is located on the shores of Lake Michigan and close to several rivers. The State of Illinois where Chicago is located has a high-level of agricultural activities [ 40 ]. Chicago is in need of additional energy and has a great potential for developing nuclear, wind, and biomass energy. In 2011, 56% of Chicago’s energy needs were met by fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas [ 41 ].

Figure 2 describes the steps in the AHP process applied in this study. The two questionnaires are prepared according to the rules of AHP. Appendix 1 shows a sample question in Questionnaire 1 and Appendix 2 shows a sample question in Questionnaire 2. The two questionnaires are prepared to obtain weights of the five assessment criteria and performance of renewable energy for each assessment criterion. The first questionnaire is developed according to the AHP methodology with pairwise comparisons (Appendix 1). The second questionnaire is used to obtain experts’ assessment of renewable energy for each criterion. The normalization step in Fig. 2 guarantees that the summation of performance scores of any energy alternative is one. The second questionnaire must be carefully administered to experts with substantial knowledge about a city and its renewable energy sources in terms of their cost, capacity, environmental impact, job creation, and security. One expert is identified to complete the second questionnaire for each city. The second questionnaire is administered to the expert repeatedly and the expert’s response is fine-tuned several times to achieve high accuracy and consistency.

Flowchart of the AHP Process

Experts surveyed in this study are from diverse fields. Questionnaire 1 was sent to 110 experts and 38 of them have provided feedback. Figure 3 summarizes areas of expertise of the 38 experts. Each expert’s response is analyzed using the AHP consistency test [ 13 ]. Among the 38 experts, 23 experts have provided responses that are consistent in terms of pairwise comparisons of criteria in Questionnaire 1. In other words, 61% of responses are consistent; this percentage is lower than expected. One reason for the low consistency rate is the number of criteria. This study investigates five assessment criteria, which require 10 pairwise comparisons. Experts may be prone to inadvertent mistakes in performing a large number of pairwise comparisons. Another reason for the low consistency rate is that Questionnaire 1 is completed by experts online. There is no real-time interaction that can further explain the questions in the questionnaire and guide the expert through the survey. Appendix 3 summarizes experts’ responses to Questionnaire 1. The geometric means of the responses from the 23 experts are calculated and normalized (Table 4 ).

Experts Completing Questionnaire 1

Weights in Table 4 together with performance scores obtained from Questionnaire 2 are used to calculate an overall score for each energy alternative for a particular city. Weights in Table 4 are independent of geographical locations or municipalities whereas experts’ assessment in response to Questionnaire 2 is for a particular location or municipality. To calculate the independent weight for a criterion, every expert’s response to a question “Which one of the two criteria is more important than the other, and at what level?” is given a scale between “1” and “9” (Table 5 ). For example, if criterion X is more important than criterion Y and it has strong importance, then criterion X has a scale of “5” (Table 5 ) and criterion Y has a scale of “ \( \frac{1}{5} \) ,” which is the reciprocal of “5.” Responses from multiple experts for each criterion are then aggregated to calculate the geometric mean, which is then normalized to compute the weight for the criterion.

Questionnaire 2 is completed by three experts each of which is an expert for one of the three cities selected for this study, Chengdu, Eskisehir, and Chicago. Experts’ responses to Questionnaire 2 are obtained through face-to-face interviews. At the beginning of an interview, the expert receives a detailed briefing on questions and the meaning of scores in Questionnaire 2. During the interview, the expert provides a score for each energy alternative and criterion. Scores are between 0 and 10 (Table 3 in the “ Results ” section). After the expert completes all questions in Questionnaire 2, the expert is shown the completed response and is asked to complete all questions again to allow the expert to confirm and fine-tune the response. Table 6 summarizes the results of Questionnaire 2 after responses from all three experts are collected and normalized. In Table 6 , “C” represents cost, “MC” represents maximum capacity, “EI” represents environmental impact, “JC” represents job creation, and “S” represents security. Results in Tables 4 and 6 are then aggregated through matrix multiplications to calculate a weighted total performance score for each energy alternative and city (Table 7 ).

For each city in Table 7 , the sum of scores for different energy alternatives in a column is 1. Solar energy is ranked at the top for Chengdu, which has a moderate amount of sunshine. The cost of developing solar energy (e.g., solar panels) in China is low because of China’s strong manufacturing and relatively low labor cost. Although solar energy does have negative environmental impact (e.g., pollution in the process of producing solar panels), this impact is considerably smaller compared to other energy alternatives. Nuclear energy is ranked the last for Chengdu. Although China has been building nuclear power plants for decades and has a long-term plan to build more, it does not have any nuclear power plant in West China where Chengdu is located. China has significantly slowed down the pace of building new nuclear power plants and has been more and more focused on developing renewable energy alternatives in recent years.

Although one of the main energy sources for Eskisehir is geothermal energy, it is ranked the fifth among all energy alternatives by the experts. There are several reasons why geothermal energy is ranked low. First, the development of additional geothermal plants is costly. Secondly, due to a large number of geothermal facilities already in Eskisehir, their collective capacity has almost reached the maximum. Thirdly, the expert is familiar with Eskisehir and concludes that geothermal energy causes significant damage to the environment. In addition to geothermal, nuclear energy is not acceptable (“0” total score in Table 7 ) for Eskisehir due to water shortage and technical challenges of building nuclear power plants. The top three energy alternatives for Eskisehir are improving efficiency, solar, and wind. Eskisehir is a large city in Turkey. Similar to Chicago discussed next, energy efficiency is extremely beneficial for large cities.

For Chicago, energy efficiency is ranked the first with the highest score 0.201 among all energy alternatives. Chicago is one of the largest cities in the USA and is expected to have a great potential for improving energy efficiency. Nuclear and hydroelectric energy rank close to the bottom because both require a large investment (“0” in Table 6 for cost), negatively impact the environment (low scores in Table 6 ), and are much less secure (low scores in Table 6 ) than other energy alternatives. The scores and rankings for Chicago are consistent with results from many studies on renewable energy.

Table 4 clearly shows that environmental impact (weight is 0.23) and security (weight is 0.15) are the two most important criteria for the assessment of energy alternatives. As climate change and environment concerns become the forefront of energy strategy and many other long-lasting economic development decisions, there is a consensus that the quality of life and sustainable development are more important than short-term economic gains. Energy alternatives that have less negative impact on environment and are more secure dominate other alternatives for long-term investment (Table 7 ).

The total scores and rankings of energy alternatives are computed using the AHP and experts’ response to Questionnaires 1 and 2. The cores and rankings might vary if there are changes in the number of experts, experts’ disciplines/background, and other factors. Weights in Questionnaire 1 are geometric means, which are not sensitive to the number of experts. It is expected that the total scores and rankings may change slightly if the number of experts varies or a different group of experts is surveyed. The methodology developed in this research provides detailed and well-justified rankings of different energy alternatives for a particular city based on experts’ input and a systematic AHP. This methodology helps decision-makers form long-term energy strategies. Decision-makers may use the outcome of this decision support system as a starting point and take into consideration other factors such as budget, collaboration with adjacent municipalities, and stakeholders’ common interest to adjust the priority of energy alternatives.

Conclusions and future research

This study develops and implements a systematic approach embedded in a decision support system to assess energy alternatives using the AHP. The methodology integrates expert knowledge and data analytics, and the output of the decision support system provides scores and rankings for a variety of energy technologies, which create a pathway and enable decision-makers to form long-term energy investment strategies for municipalities. The methodology and its implementation in this study may be expanded and adapted for other complex decisions that involve expert input and detailed analysis. Based on the analyses of the three cities in this study, Chengdu, Eskisehir, and Chicago, improving energy efficiency and development of solar and wind energy are the three most preferred energy alternatives whereas nuclear and hydroelectric are the least preferred energy alternatives. This result is in line with decades of research and development in energy alternatives and shows a clear direction for the future development of energy alternatives around the world. There are differences in the rankings of energy alternatives for different cities, indicating that it is necessary to apply the decision support system developed in this study to help form customized energy strategies for cities with unique characteristics.

Future research may focus on implementing the methodology to adjacent cities and generate a map for renewable energy investment, which can be used to coordinate the development of energy alternatives for a large region. In addition, the number of experts and the disciplines from which experts are selected, and the questions in the questionnaires, may be adjusted to further reduce potential bias. Fuzzy AHP and other methods may be used to model the uncertainty in experts’ assessment of energy alternatives. Last but not least, the outcome of this study comprises of scores and rankings of energy alternatives, which may be input to a mathematical model that can be solved with additional constraints such as total budget to find the optimal investment strategy.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this article.

Abbreviations

• Analytic hierarchy process

Analytic network process

Data envelopment analysis

ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité

European Union

Gross domestic product

Technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS)

VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje

Carli R, Dotoli M, Pellegrino R (2018) Multi-criteria decision-making for sustainable metropolitan cities. J Environ Manage 226:46–61

Article   Google Scholar  

Carli R, Dotoli M, Pellegrino R (2017) A hierarchical decision-making strategy for the energy management of smart cities. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 14:505–523

Lee CW, Zhong J (2014) Top down strategy for renewable energy investment: Conceptual framework and implementation. Renew Energy 68:761–773

Aguilar FX, Cai Z (2010) Exploratory analysis of prospects for renewable energy private investment in the U.S. Energy Econ 32:1245–1252

Zhang MM, Zhou P, Zhou DQ (2016) A real options model for renewable energy investment with application to solar photovoltaic power generation in China. Energy Econ 59:213–226

Simsek HA, Simsek N (2013) Recent incentives for renewable energy in Turkey. Energy Policy 63:521–530

Kılkış Ş (2015) Composite index for benchmarking local energy systems of Mediterranean port cities. Energy 92:622–638

Kılkış Ş (2016) Sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems index for Southeast European cities. J Clean Prod 130:222–234

Mattiussi A, Rosano M, Simeoni P (2014) A decision support system for sustainable energy supply combining multi-objective and multi-attribute analysis: An Australian case study. Decis Support Syst 57:150–159

Romero SR, Santos AC, Gil MA (2012) EU plans for renewable energy: An application to the Spanish case. Renew Energy 43:322–330

Bulavskaya T, Reynès F (2018) Job creation and economic impact of renewable energy in the Netherlands. Renew Energy 119:528–538

Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1:83–98

Google Scholar  

Saaty TL (1990) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 48:9–26

Vargas LG (1990) An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. Eur J Oper Res 48:2–8

Akash BA, Mamlook R, Mohsen MS (1999) Multi-criteria selection of electric power plants using analytical hierarchy process. Electr Power Syst Res 52:29–35

Amer M, Daim TU (2011) Selection of renewable energy technologies for a developing county: A case of Pakistan. Energy Sustain Dev 15:420–435

Daniel J, Vishal NVR, Albert B, Selvarsan I (2010) Evaluation of the significant renewable energy resources in India using Analytical Hierarchy Process. In: Ehrgott M, Naujoks B, Stewart T, Wallenius J (eds) Multiple criteria decision making for sustainable energy and transportation systems. Springer, Berlin; Heidelberg, pp 13–26

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Demirtas O (2013) Evaluating the best renewable energy technology for sustainable energy planning. Int J Energy Econ Policy 3:23–33

Kabir ABMZ, Shihan SMA (2003) Selection of renewable energy sources using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Proceeding of the 7th International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Bali, pp 267–276

Kaya T, Kahraman C (2010) Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: the case of Istanbul. Energy 35:2517–2527

Løken E (2007) Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning problems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 11:1584–1595

Nigim K, Munier N, Green J (2004) Pre-feasibility MCDM tools to aid communities in prioritizing local viable renewable energy sources. Renew Energy 29:1775–1791

Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M (2004) Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning—A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 8:365–381

Yazdani-Chamzini A, Fouladgar MM, Zavadskas EK, Moini SHH (2013) Selecting the optimal renewable energy using multi criteria decision making. J Bus Econ Manag 14:957–978

Sindhu SP, Nehra V, Luthra S (2016) Recognition and prioritization of challenges in growth of solar energy using analytical hierarchy process: Indian outlook. Energy 100:332–348

Uyan M (2013) GIS-based solar farms site selection using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in Karapinar region, Konya/Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 28:11–17

Papalexandrou MA, Pilavachi PA, Chatzimouratidis AI (2008) Evaluation of liquid bio-fuels using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Process Saf Environ Prot 86:360–374

Okello C, Pindozzi S, Faugno S, Boccia L (2014) Appraising bioenergy alternatives in Uganda using strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT)-analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and a desirability functions approach. Energies 7:1171–1192

Choudhary D, Shankar R (2012) An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: a case study from India. Energy 42:510–521

Peng J (2012) Research on the optimization of green suppliers based on AHP and GRA. Int J Inf Comput Sci 9:173–182

Chiu R-H, Lin L-H, Ting SC (2014) Evaluation of green port factors and performance: a fuzzy AHP analysis. Math Probl Eng 5:1–12

Cheng C, Zhou Y-H, Yue K-W, Yang J, He Z-Y, Liang N (2011) Study of SEA indicators system of urban green electricity power based on fuzzy AHP and DPSIR model. Energy Procedia 12:155–162

Aras H, Erdoğmuş Ş, Koç E (2004) Multi-criteria selection for a wind observation station location using analytic hierarchy process. Renew Energ 29:1383–1392

Lee SK, Mogi G, Hui KS (2013) A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP)/data envelopment analysis (DEA) hybrid model for efficiently allocating energy R&D resources: In the case of energy technologies against high oil prices. Renew Sust Energ Rev 21:347–355

Mohsen MS, Akash BA (1997) Evaluation of domestic solar water heating system in Jordan using analytic hierarchy process. Energy Convers Manag 38:1815–1822

Afgan NH, Carvalho MG (2002) Multi-criteria assessment of new and renewable energy power plants. Energy 27:739–755

Budak G, Kara İ, İç YT (2017) Weighting the positions and skills of volleyball sport by using AHP: A real life application. IOSR J Sports Phys Educ 4:23–29

Saaty TL (1990) Decision making for leaders: the analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world. RWS Publications

Acaroglu H, Baykul MC (2019) Economic guideline about financial utilization of flat-plate solar collectors for the consumer segment in the city of Eskisehir. Renew Sust Energ Rev 81:2045–2058

U.S. Energy Information Administration. Illinois State Profiles and Energy Estimates, https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=IL ; 2019 [accessed 13 Mar 2019].

Illinois Commerce Commission. Environmental Disclosure Statements, https://www.icc.illinois.gov/electricity/utilityreporting/environmentaldisclosurearchive.aspx ; 2011 [accessed 13 Mar 2019].

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank 110 experts who were contacted for this study and 38 experts who provided detailed feedback to the questionnaires.

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, Edwardsville, IL, 62026-1805, USA

Gerçek Budak, Xin Chen, Serdar Celik & Berk Ozturk

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

GB is the first author of this article. GB has made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work and has helped draft the work. GB has approved the submitted version and agreed both be personally accountable for his own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. XC is the second author and corresponding author of this article. XC has made substantial contributions to the interpretation of data and has substantively revised this article for submission. XC has approved the submitted version and agreed both to be personally accountable for his own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. As the corresponding author, XC confirms that data/tables/figures/materials presentation accurately reflects the original. XC also confirms that the manuscript did not benefit from the use of editorial services. SC is the third author of this article. SC has made substantial contributions to the conception of the work and acquisition of data. SC has approved the submitted version and agreed both to be personally accountable for his own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. BO is the fourth author of this article. BO has made substantial contributions to the acquisition and analysis of data and creation of the surveys. BO has approved the submitted version and agreed both to be personally accountable for his own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xin Chen .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

A Sample question in Questionnaire 1

A Sample question in Questionnaire 2

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Budak, G., Chen, X., Celik, S. et al. A systematic approach for assessment of renewable energy using analytic hierarchy process. Energ Sustain Soc 9 , 37 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-019-0219-y

Download citation

Received : 30 April 2019

Accepted : 29 August 2019

Published : 11 September 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-019-0219-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Multi-criteria decision-making
• Renewable energy
• Sustainability

Energy, Sustainability and Society

ISSN: 2192-0567

• General enquiries: [email protected]

English Editing Research Services

Alternative Energy Research: 6 Areas for Your Science to Save the Planet

There’s little debate that our current use of energy is unsustainable. Science must create solutions for this. Alternative energy remains a very hot topic (no pun intended), and going down this research path offers a promising career for scientific researchers. Even among industry and academia competition , there’s no shortage of need in this area.

As pollution levels and global temperatures rise, the centuries of relying on fossil fuels appear to be winding down. This triggers alarm in society, but it also signals huge opportunities for researchers.

This gives researchers a clear path to seeing their work have real-life impact.

Research is also urgently needed to help industry meet demand. This demand is not only driven by market forces. And most governments have policies encouraging renewables, because they are committed to fighting climate change, or at least demonstrating they are.

China , for example, is expected to consume 23% of the world’s energy by 2035. Yet it’s announced it has scrapped plans to build 85 proposed coal-fired power plants. Instead, by 2020, it will invest $360 million in renewable energy, while further trying to reduce its dependence on coal.

Indeed, many of the opportunities for research occur in countries that have set ambitious targets for increasing renewable energy. Industry, however, is border-independent, and also offers forums for researchers to continue their work, and be paid for it.

Here we’ll look at what it takes to make an impact in this area, and where that impact can be made.

What academic background do you need to do green research?

Renewable energy research is multi-disciplinary, and calls upon a range of abilities. A good place to start is an undergraduate degree in subjects such as physical sciences, engineering, environmental science, or statistics, from which point you can work up to a higher degree.

With great potential seen in a wide range of energy sources, there’s a lot for aspiring researchers to choose from. However, some themes are in particular need of attention. These areas are also attracting increased funding.

In most cases, the national governments direct funding universities and research institutes, as well as international collaborations. In advanced stages of research, collaboration involves companies in trying out models; in these cases you have the chance to work on industrial applications as well.

Some large corporations, such as Tesla, invest in their own labs and R&D departments for exploring technology they’ll need to keep pushing the boundaries. Large companies can be an excellent place to check for research posts.

The World Economic Forum has identified overwhelming emphasis on clean energy needs , and that sets the tone for these key areas.

Key areas for green research

1. improving storage of renewables.

At the present, the leading priority is improving storage of energy from renewable sources such as solar and wind. Intermittency is one of the biggest problems facing these two energy sources, as their production can fluctuate, even within a day, depending on the weather. Batteries used to store energy are also one of the most expensive components in the use of renewable energy.

These can vary from small units used with rooftop solar home installations or those for storing power at solar and wind generation plants.

Even though the capacity of lithium ion batteries is improving, you may be surprised at the number of alternatives being developed.

Advanced materials such as magnesium, vanadium, calcium, sulfur, and lithium-air batteries are receiving increasing attention, all making energy storage research a vast field.

Universities and institutes

Many of the universities that offer research programs in storage capacity are based in the United States.

• At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Virginia Tech , work continues on scalable sulfur batteries.
• Texas A&M University is concentrating on magnesium batteries.
• The governmental Argonne National Laboratory and the University of Illinois, both near Chicago, are working on lithium-oxygen batteries .

Industrial applications

The Chinese government is investing in manufacturers such as Contemporary Amperex Technology Ltd. and Lishen , which are the largest premier battery manufacturers in the country

Those interested could find jobs with these companies to continue research and technology development aimed at practical applications.

China is leading the way in investing in next generation batteries, and plans to install them to store the energy produced from new large-scale solar and wind capacities.

The country is expected to soon be a world leader in not only producing solar panels but also lithium batteries, and these can be then subsequently be used to generate electricity. For example, China’s vanadium flow batteries built by Pu Neng are the largest of their kind in the world.

2. Stabilization of power grids

The second research priority is developing smart grids, especially micro-grids, to deal with intermittency. These rely heavily not only on digital technology, but also on compatible hardware. So if you are an engineer, a software specialist, or from the physical sciences, this area of study may suit for you.

Two types of grids are being studied: transmission grids and distribution grids. Since solar and wind sources are increasingly becoming decentralized, distribution grids are necessary to collect energy from multiple generation points.

As production of energy increases, it’s necessary to either expand the network or make it more flexible and smarter through digitalization.

Smart and better grids are needed to carry the increased loads of electricity, as well as balance supply and demand. For example, in Germany, the new wind power stations are in the north, while industries that need this energy are in the south.

If you’re interested in grids, there is probably an institute not too far away that offers a suitable research program, as this is such an important theme.

• The UCLA Smart Grid Energy Research Center (or SMERC ), in Los Angeles, works with the US Department of Energy. Here you can work on improving grid flexibility and efficiency, integrating renewable energy and electric cars, reducing power outages, and making the pricing of electricity competitive.
• The State Grid Smart Grid Research Institute ( SGRI) in China is a prominent research institute engaged in this field. SGRI is directly funded and controlled by the Chinese government.
• Other universities where you can conduct research in smart grids are Boston University and University of Maryland in the US, Tianjin University in China, the University of Bradford and University of Birmingham in the UK; and the National Research Foundation in Singapore. The MSc Smart Electrical Networks and Systems program is a degree open to international students and is accredited by the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). This program is offered jointly by seven universities in France, Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. Scholarships are available, regardless of your nationality.

One of the most important group promoting smart grids is the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Smart Grid . This is the largest global technical organization in the world. Their Grid Vision 2050 is to develop solid state transformers, wireless beamed power, quantum key distribution, network architectures, and overlays. The IEEE is involved in the development of new technology by building collaborations among different organizations, so it should be possible for you to work on practical applications through them.

Many regions across the globe are investing in grids, the prominent countries are the US, EU, China, and India. Other countries that are attractive markets for this technology include Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Russia, and Singapore.

3. Electric vehicles (EVs)

• Research is conducted to optimizing battery performance in conditions specific to automobiles. Research at the University of Wisconsin (USA) looked at the effects of cold winter temperature on the thickness of the SEI layer. The findings could potentially prolong battery life if industry adopts them.
• The U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducts consumer research. Study there is looking at the impact of domestic electricity withdrawal by plug-in cars on the electricity grid. NREL wants to model smart grids of the future using this information. If you have computer stimulation skills, you may wish to apply for this research.

The R&D department of Contemporary Amperex Technology has made China the largest supplier of automotive batteries. Research and engineering posts here will get you involved in practical applications

4. Concentrating solar power

CSP is meant for large-scale solar energy productions. This technology produces energy using solar heat that can be stored. Instead of photovoltaic panels, CSP uses mirrors and reflectors to harness sunlight to produce heat, which in turn generates electricity.

Moreover, hybrid plants can combine CSP and other sources of energy to maintain a continuous supply of electricity for cities or an entire region.

This increases its appeal for immediate implementation. Because of the space needed, CSP plants are usually located in deserts where the incoming solar radiation is also optimum.

Universities

The University of Perpignan in France conducts research and also offers courses for post-graduate students on CSP.

Collaborations

The NREL is at the forefront in the US, bringing together universities and industries, to develop CSP. It’s interested in high-flux solar furnaces, large-payload solar trackers, advanced optical materials, advanced thermal storage materials, and optical characterization. So if you’re interested in hands-on work in producing new technology, NREL is worth considering.

The US has been a world leader in CSP with desert installations such as Mojave, Genesis, and Solana. Now nine other countries with abundant sunlight—Spain, Australia, China, India, Morocco, South Africa, Chile, Saudi Arabia, and UAE—also want to substantially invest in this technology.

5. Offshore wind power

The best wind resources are available offshore, but there are very few offshore wind power facilities in the world. This is because fixed structures are viable only in shallow seas. Therefore, floating wind turbines are being developed for deep seas, because these are the places where wind power is most abundant.

• UK and Chinese scientists are cooperating on five projects to produce the next generation of floating wind turbines. They’re focusing on load reduction of floating offshore wind platforms by taking environmental conditions into consideration. The project is funded by UK’s EPSRC and the Natural Environment Research Council, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China .
• The Technical University of Denmark offers a Dual Degree Programme in offshore wind energy engineering, with the Korean Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST). In this post-graduation course you get to spend one year in Denmark and one year in Korea, and get degrees from both universities.
• The University of California (US), Durham Research Institute (UK), and The University of Tokyo are some other universities that can be considered for research on offshore wind turbines.

The UK has in many ways been the world leader in both research and use of floating wind turbine. Norway is now getting more involved. At Norway’s SINTEF Ocean’s SeaLab facility you’ll find researchers and industries working together conducting research and testing floating offshore wind power models, which are ready for the market.

Europe is by far the top market for offshore floating wind power . It’s using wind power to provide electricity, and move away from fossil fuels. In 2017, there was a 25% increase in this sector. The UK, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium are countries that have most of the offshore installations.

6. Geothermal energy

These can be small, decentralized units for heating, cooling, and electricity generation at home or institutions. The energy can also be used at district level for heating, or to generate power for electricity. This energy source is stable and unaffected by climatic conditions, but is underused; the main reason is the high initial capital costs.

• The University of Adelaide is part of the South Australian Centre for Geothermal Energy Research. Research is conducted here on fluid rock interactions, crustal stress characterization, development of geophysical tools, and fracture modelling to make this energy cost-effective.
• Top institutions conducting research in geothermal energy are Durham University, Cranfield University, University of Exeter and University of Cambridge in the UK, the University of Bern in Switzerland, and the University of Portland in the US. Bern is studying aquifer-hosted, fracture-hosted, and petrothermal systems, as well as mineral scaling and corrosion in geothermal systems.
• The Iceland School of Energy at Reykjavík University offers a master’s program in sustainable energy, where geothermal and other renewable energy are covered. Here you can study business solutions as well as the science of these energy sources.

The European Geothermal Energy Council funds research, innovation, and demonstrations of new techniques by involving not only research institutes but also consider tenders from industry, thereby encouraging their involvement. Since these funds are meant for European organizations, you would have to work or study in Europe to take advantage of these grants.

China and Turkey account for 80% of geothermal energy use, which is generated through small-scale units. Turkey uses 30% of its capacity in agriculture. The US, Indonesia, and the Philippines are other major users of this energy. The largest expansion will be in China, which is seeking to reduce air pollution. Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Hungary are investing in district-level geothermal plants for heating.

Expanding horizons is key for renewable energy research

The main research efforts concentrate on improving energy efficiency of established energy sources to meet the targets set by The Paris Agreement to limit climate change. However, that has not stopped exploration of new venues like using algae for energy.

If you have an idea that could produce clean energy, work on your elevator pitch . You just might get funded. When you’re ready to publish your research, we’re here to help you choose a journal , evaluate your work, and edit you to submission.

Frequently Asked Questions About Renewables

• Share via Twitter
• Share via Facebook
• Share via Email

What is renewable energy?

As a category, renewable energy encompasses a broad range of energy technologies and fuels, ranging from photovoltaic solar cells to the burning of animal dung for fuel in many poor regions of the world. Major sources of renewable energy –– in the rough order of the amount of energy they contribute globally –– include hydroelectric power, wood used for heating, cooking, and electrical generation, bioenergy produced from agricultural crops and waste, wind energy, concentrated solar power generated with mirrors and steam turbines, photovoltaic solar cells, geothermal energy, and tidal energy.

Sources of “renewable” energy are finite but inexhaustible, meaning that there is a physical limit to how much energy might be produced from any given renewable energy technology, but the maximum utilization of that technology in the present does not diminish our ability to utilize it in the future. There is, for instance, a theoretical limit to the amount of solar radiation that might be harnessed for energy production today, but fully utilizing all of the solar radiation hitting the earth today does not diminish our ability to fully utilize that radiation tomorrow. Similarly, burning wood for fuel this year does not diminish the long term capacity to burn wood for fuel so long as the amount of wood harvested for fuel annually does not exceed the rate at which forests grow.

Is it possible to power the entire world with renewables?

That depends on what you mean. Until a few hundred years ago, we powered the entire world almost entirely with renewable forms of energy, mostly by burning wood for fuel, using animal fats like whale oil for lighting, and using animal labor for motive power. 1 But 100 years ago, the world had vastly fewer people, virtually all of whom were significantly poorer than the average person today. 2

So the question is whether we can power today’s world, or, more accurately, the world in 2040 or 2050, with renewable energy. The world in 2050, with a population exceeding 9 billion people and a greater proportion having achieved modern living standards, will almost certainly require at least twice as much energy as the world today, and more than 50 times more energy than was required to power the pre-industrial world when we last depended primarily on renewable energy sources. 3

Some analyses suggest that it is theoretically possible to power today’s world with renewable energy, but these analyses uniformly assume drastic reductions in global energy consumption. 4 Such projections also assume significant breakthroughs in the scalability and reliability of renewable energy technologies while typically failing to account for the costs or the amount of land needed to scale up to levels consistent with meeting expected future energy demand.

How much of the world’s energy comes from renewable sources today?

Currently, the world gets about 9 percent of its primary energy from renewables sources. That compares with close to 100 percent in 1800, about 60 percent in 1900, and 38 percent in 1950. Of today’s 9 percent, approximately 74 percent is produced by hydroelectric dams, 13 percent is produced by bioenergy, 10 percent is produced by wind turbines and 2 percent from solar power. Some nations get most of their electricity from renewables; of these, most get the vast majority of that energy from hydropower, notably Brazil, which gets 75 percent of its electricity from hydropower, Norway, which gets 96 percent, and Sweden and Switzerland, which each get about 50 percent. 5

Some advanced developed economies have met significant percentages of their electricity demand with solar and wind energy at certain times. Solar power, for instance, supplied over 50 percent of Germany’s electricity demand for a few hours during a sunny weekend in 2012. 8 But overall, solar provided only about 5 percent of Germany’s total electricity generation that year. All together, Germany gets a quarter of its electricity from renewables. But about half of that still comes from hydropower and biomass.

Some countries have reached considerable penetrations of wind energy. Denmark, for instance, gets 34 percent of its electricity from wind turbines. 9 But that is made possible because Denmark’s grid is interconnected with Sweden’s. When the wind isn’t blowing, Denmark is able to import large volumes of Swedish hydro and nuclear power, and when Denmark has more wind than it needs, it can export it to Sweden. As a percentage of generation on the total interconnected grid, Denmark’s wind represents a significantly lower percentage of total electrical generation.

Global Energy Consumption by Source, 2012:

Why has it proven so difficult to scale wind and solar energy?

Harnessing energy flows, such as the blowing wind and the shining sun, rather than utilizing energy stocks, such as fossil fuels or uranium, has the advantage of being an inexhaustible resource but the disadvantage of being extremely diffuse. Wind turbines must be deployed across vast landscapes to capture enough energy to meet the demands of a modern economy. Solar radiation is, theoretically, less diffuse. But current solar panel technologies don’t convert that energy to electricity very efficiently. The places in which solar radiation and wind are most abundant are also often far removed from the places where electricity is needed, requiring costly long distance transmission. 11

Wind and solar energy are also highly intermittent. As a result, solar and wind generation capacity must be heavily overbuilt, meaning that the actual energy produced by solar panels and wind turbines is substantially less than what is theoretically possible. Typically, a 100 MW wind farm will not have a capacity factor above 30 percent, meaning that on average, a wind farm with a total capacity of 100 MW will only produce about 30 MW of electricity. Capacity factors for solar panels are typically lower, in the range of 10 to 25 percent. 12 In northerly climates like Germany, the average capacity factor for solar panels is around 10 percent. 13 Hence, while Germany’s installed solar generation on rare occasions produces upwards of 50 percent of its total electricity, annually it only produces about 5 percent.

Taken together, these challenges present substantial obstacles to scaling solar and wind energy. The need to overbuild generation capacity substantially increases costs, as does the need to transmit electricity across very long distances. Lacking very large-scale and affordable energy storage technologies, wind and solar require the availability of substantial backup generation capacity, usually coal- or gas-fired generation that can be ramped up and down quickly in response to highly variable electricity production, further adding to the cost of integrating wind and solar into electrical grids as grid penetration rises. 14

What are the land impacts of renewables?

Present-day wind and solar technologies are very low-density, and generating large amounts of electricity from them comes with substantial land use implications. The recently completed Ivanpah concentrated solar facility, for instance, produces about the same amount of electricity as two small modular nuclear reactors but requires 92 times as much land as the nuclear plant. 15 The recently approved Hinkley nuclear plant in Great Britain will produce the same amount of electricity as a 250,000-acre wind farm on a 430-acre site. 16

As such, scaling wind and solar will bring significant environmental impacts for ecosystems, biodiversity, watersheds, and viewsheds. Even at relatively low levels of deployment, those impacts have generated significant local opposition to wind and solar development, often from environmental groups themselves, creating significant obstacles to large-scale expansion of wind and solar. 19

What are realistic expectations for wind and solar, given current technology?

Despite the challenges enumerated above, it is likely that wind and solar energy will play a significant role in our energy future. The cost of energy produced from solar panels and wind turbines has declined significantly. Continuing declines in the cost of photovoltaic solar panels may open up much larger markets for rooftop solar while similar improvements in the cost and performance of wind turbines may make large-scale on- and offshore wind farms economically viable in the coming decades. Taken together, these continuing developments may allow wind and solar energy to grow from present levels, which are negligible globally, to something on the order of 15 or 20 percent of global electricity generation over the next three or four decades. Few detailed energy technology assessments, however, expect wind and solar to account for a significantly larger share of global electricity, much less primary energy, without fundamental breakthroughs across a range of technologies, including much more efficient solar cells and utility scale energy storage technologies. 20

BP expects non-hydro renewables (including solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and other) to supply about 14 percent of global electricity in 2035. Beyond electricity, BP projects non-hydro renewables and bioenergy will supply about 7 percent of total primary energy, up from about 2 percent today. 21

Source: BP Statistical Review 2013

Can biofuels scale up significantly?

Source: Wise et al. 2009. 22

Next-generation technologies to create cellulosic fuels from agricultural waste, or from more land efficient crops such as switchgrass, are somewhat less land intensive, but would still require vast resources – water, land, and fertilizers – to produce fuels that would displace petroleum at significant scale. Very advanced technologies to produce fuels from algae or other microorganisms might allow for much more land efficient fuel production, but those technologies are still highly speculative.

How much more do renewables cost in comparison to other sources?

It depends on what you count. For some consumers in some places, the cost of electricity from rooftop solar photovoltaic panels is comparable to the retail cost of grid electricity. But that doesn’t reflect the full costs. In the United States, the federal investment tax credit subsidizes about one-third of the cost of buying and installing solar panels. 23 Other subsidies at the state level frequently augment that subsidy. Net metering policies in many states provide even more subsidies, requiring utilities to buy back power from solar producers at several times the effective rate at which they could purchase power on the wholesale market. 24

The US Energy Information Agency attempts to make “apples-to-apples” comparisons of the cost of different electricity generation technologies by estimating the “levelized cost of energy” (LCOE). LCOE is an estimate of the unit costs of electricity generated by different technologies, typically expressed in dollars per megawatt-hour ($/MWh) after public subsidies are accounted for.

Below are DOE’s Energy Information Administration (EIA)’s most recent LCOE figures:

LCOE, however, does not capture the full costs of different energy technologies. All energy technologies impose indirect costs of one form or another in addition to the direct costs calculated through LCOE. Due to its capital-intensive nature, for instance, nuclear power faces substantial upfront financing costs. 26 The burning of fossil fuels impose substantial externalized costs on society, in the form of public health costs and climate change, along with the often substantial costs of procuring and transporting fuels. Renewable energy technologies create unique “system costs” in addition to the direct costs of generating power. 27

broadly defined, include the costs of backup generation, storage, and overbuilt renewables capacity; balancing, voltage control, and curtailment costs of intermittent power; and the cost of transmitting power over long distances from the point of generation to load centers.

The costs associated with overbuilding, firming, and backing up intermittent renewables are modest at low penetrations. But at higher penetrations they become substantial. Germany is today scaling back its renewable subsidies and mandates in part because costs associated with backing up its growing renewable energy capacity have grown substantially. 29

Source: Clean Air Task Force; LBNL; NREL .

While intermittent renewables carry costs that LCOE calculations fail to account for, they also bring unique benefits that can also be undervalued. A benefit of solar power, for instance, is that in sunny, warm areas, solar panels can produce at their highest capacity when daily electricity demand peaks. This can make the value of solar power high enough to justify its higher relative costs. However, these benefits decline as renewables penetration increases. Above 10 to 20 percent of electricity generation, the value of solar power to a grid declines substantially. Wind power sees less decline in its value to the grid as penetrations rise, but that is because its value to the grid compared to solar power is lower to start with, as wind generation fluctuations are less usefully or predictably correlated with demand load. 30

In some locales, most notably Northern Europe, peak load occurs in colder months, when sunlight is exceptionally scarce, further lowering the capacity value of technologies like solar power. 32

These issues might be resolved through the development of utility-scale energy storage technologies. However, those technologies do not yet, for the most part, exist and will also entail not insignificant additional costs to electrical systems.

Isn’t the cost of solar coming down rapidly?

As deployment of solar panels has risen over several decades, the cost of manufacturing solar panel modules has declined consistently. Between 2007 and 2012, solar panel costs declined precipitously. Recent rates of rapid cost declines are not expected to continue by most industry analysts, however. The recent price declines have been driven by over-production as much as real reductions in actual production costs. Heavy solar subsidies in developed countries, like the United States and Germany, combined with heavy production subsidies in China and other developing countries created a global glut of solar manufacturing capacity and solar module inventories. Chinese firms, in particular, have been accused of dumping excess production capacity at below the cost of production in key export markets such as the United States and Europe. Trade actions taken by the United States Trade Commission and the European Community have alleged that Chinese dumping has depressed the price of solar modules by as much as 75 percent.

Actions to scale back solar subsidies in many parts of the world have triggered a consolidation within the industry, with module inventories declining and manufacturing facilities closing. As this has occurred, module prices have begun to rise. Over the longer term, module costs will likely revert to long-term cost trends, with prices coming down more slowly. Declining module costs, however, will have a less pronounced effect on solar system costs going forward then they have in the past. This is because module costs no longer represent the lion’s share of total solar costs.

While module costs have fallen, other costs associated with solar panels have not. Because solar technology in general, and rooftop solar most of all, tends to be more distributed than conventional power plants like natural gas or nuclear plants, solar systems typically have a much higher ratio of installation, permitting, interconnection, and other non-hardware costs in relation to the cost of producing the actual hardware and fuel. While “soft costs” of this nature can also see returns to scale, they don’t spill over from one economy to another in the same way that hardware costs do. Solar modules are a globally traded commodity, where cost reductions in, for instance, Chinese manufacturing, benefit solar costs everywhere. The same is not the case with regard to skilled labor and services. Labor-intensive economic services tend to get more, not less, expensive over the long term.

But isn’t the fact that renewables are more distributed an advantage over conventional energy technologies?

At lower levels of generation, distributed generation sited close to demand load can provide substantial benefits in the form of avoided costs of transmission and capacity. However, as illustrated above, these marginal benefits decline as penetration increases. 33

Any future in which renewables constitute a much larger share of our energy mix is likely to see more centralization not less. All the major scenarios modeling large penetrations of renewable electricity foresee the vast majority of renewable energy, including wind and solar, coming from large power plants, requiring massive, new long-distance transmission infrastructure and not home and commercial installations.

Would renewables be more economically competitive without subsidies for fossil fuels?

While fossil fuels worldwide enjoy more absolute subsidization than renewable energy, fossil fuels also supply vastly greater quantities of energy than do renewables. Calculated as subsidy per unit of energy generated, fossil fuels receive vastly lower subsidies than renewables like wind and solar. Moreover, these subsidies represent a very small portion of their per-unit cost of energy. 34 While there may be good reason to remove subsidies for fossil energy as a matter of policy, particularly in developed economies where universal access to modern energy has long been a reality, there is little evidence to suggest that removing fossil energy subsidies would substantially reduce fossil fuel dependence or increase renewable energy deployment. A large share of global subsidies for fossil fuels are actually in the developing world, where governments often subsidize access to electricity and modern heating, cooking, and transportation fuels for poor communities. 35 In these cases, removing subsidies would be unlikely to result in poor communities in developing economies turning to renewable energy sources, which remain substantially more expensive. Removing these subsidies, however, would, in the near term, almost certainly reduce access to modern energy services in many developing economies. 36, 37

Can emerging economies “leapfrog” from wood and dung to distributed renewables?

modern energy services to poor communities throughout the world must account for how access to those services might most cost-effectively be extended. One recent study, by the Center for Global Development, found that tens of millions more sub-Saharan Africans can achieve electricity access using centralized, gas-fired generation than current off-grid renewable technologies. 38

Strategies to extend energy access through off-grid renewable energy systems must also account for a broader development context. If off-grid and micro-grid solutions to provide access to modern energy services are to be successful, they must 1) facilitate “productive uses” of energy, or energy consumption that spur economic development; and 2) function in a way where connection to the central grid is achievable at some point in the future. 39 Installing off-grid generation technologies without considering these conditions risks partitioning the process of expanding energy access from the broader processes of urbanization, industrialization, democratization, and economic growth. 40

1. Grubler, Arnulf. 2008. "Energy transitions." In: Encyclopedia of Earth. Eds. Cutler J. Cleveland. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment. http://user.iiasa.ac.at/~gruebler/Data/EoE_Data.html .

2. Bolt, J. and J. L. van Zanden (2013). The First Update of the Maddison Project; Re-Estimating Growth Before 1820. Maddison Project Working Paper 4. http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/data.htm .

3. IIASA Population Projections. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/research/modelsData/PopulationProjections/POP.en.html .

4. Loftus, Peter J.; Cohen, Armond M.; Long, Jane C.S.; Jenkins, Jesse D. In Press. “Global Decarbonization Scenarios: A Critical Review.” WIRES Climate Change.

5. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2013. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html .

6. Trembath, Alex; Nordhaus, Ted; Shellenberger, Michael; Luke, Max. 2013. Coal Killer: How Natural Gas Fuels the Clean Energy Revolution . Breakthrough Institute. http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/programs/energy-and-climate/coal-killer .

7. Grubler, Arnulf. 2008. "Energy transitions." In: Encyclopedia of Earth. Eds. Cutler J. Cleveland. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment. http://user.iiasa.ac.at/~gruebler/Data/EoE_Data.html .

8. Steadman, Ian. 2012. “Germany sets solar record, meets half of electricity demand.” Wired Magazine . http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-05/28/germany-sets-solar-power-record .

9. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2013. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html .

10. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2013. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html .

20. Nicholson, Megan; Stepp, Matthew. “Challenging the Clean Energy Deployment Consensus.” Center for Clean Energy Innovation. October 2013. http://energyinnovation.us/portfolio-items/challenging-the-clean-energy-deployment-consensus/ .

21. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2013. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html .

24. Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE). http://www.dsireusa.org/ .

26. Nordhaus, Ted; Lovering, Jessica; Shellenberger, Michael. “How to Make Nuclear Cheap: Safety, Readiness, Modularity, and Efficiency.” Breakthrough Institute. July 2013. http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/programs/energy-and-climate/how-to-make-nuclear-cheap .

27. Electric Power Research Institute. “The Integrated Grid: Realizing the Full Value of Central and Distributed Energy Resources.” 2014. http://www.eenews.net/assets/2014/02/10/document_cw_02.pdf .

28. April Lee et al., “Interactions, Complementarities and Tensions at the Nexus of Natural Gas and Renewable Energy,” The Electricity Journal, 25 (December 2012).

29. Nicola, Stefan. “German Lawmakers Vote to Reduce Renewable-Energy Subsidies.” Bloomberg . June 27, 2014. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-27/german-lawmakers-back-new-clean-energy-law-to-reduce-subsidies.html .

30. Mills, Andrew and Wiser, Ryan. 2012. “Changes in the Economic Value of Variable Generation at High Penetration Levels: A Pilot Case Study of California.” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL-5445E). http://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbnl-5445e.pdf .

31. Mills, Andrew and Wiser, Ryan. 2012. “Changes in the Economic Value of Variable Generation at High Penetration Levels: A Pilot Case Study of California.” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL-5445E). http://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbnl-5445e.pdf .

32. Burger, Bruno. 2014. “Electricity production from solar and wind in Germany in 2013.” Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE. http://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/downloads-englisch/pdf-files-englisch/news/electricity-production-from-solar-and-wind-in-germany-in-2013.pdf .

35. Plumer, Brad. “IMF: Want to fight climate change? Get rid of $1.9 trillion in energy subsidies.” The Washington Post . March 27, 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/27/imf-want-to-fight-climate-change-get-rid-of-1-9-trillion-in-energy-subsidies/ .

36. Jenkins, Jesse. “Phasing Out Fossil Fuel Subsidies Will Help, But Only Innovation Can Make Clean Energy Cheap.” Breakthrough Institute. November 10, 2010. http://thebreakthrough.org/archive/phasing_out_fossil_fuel_subsid .

37. Jesse Jenkins, Mark Muro, Ted Nordhaus, Michael Shellenberger, Letha Tawney, and Alex Trembath, “Beyond Boom & Bust: Putting Clean Tech on a Path to Subsidy Independence,” Breakthrough Institute, Brookings Institution, and World Resources Institute, April 2012.

38. Moss, Todd and Ben Leo. “Nature Gas vs Renewables for OPIC: What’s the Tradeoff?” Center for Global Development. January 30, 2014. http://www.cgdev.org/blog/natural-gas-vs-renewables-opic-whats-tradeoff .

39. Trembath, Alex. “The Low-Energy Club: Sierra Club Report Calls for Universal Electricity Access at 0.15 Percent California Levels.” Breakthrough Institute. June 30, 2014. http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/programs/energy-and-climate/the-low-energy-club .

40. Caine, Mark et al. “Our High-Energy Planet.” Breakthrough Institute. April 2014. http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/programs/energy-and-climate/our-high-energy-planet .

Breakthrough Staff

Recent articles, peter teague announced as 2024 paradigm award winner.

Jan 25, 2024

Comparing the NRC and EPA Risk Regulatory Regime

Jul 14, 2023

Taiwan and Climate Change

May 19, 2023

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

2. climate, energy and environmental policy.

A majority of Americans consider climate change a priority today so that future generations can have a sustainable planet, and this view is held across generations.

Looking to the future, the public is closely divided on what it will take to address climate change: While about half say it’s likely major lifestyle changes in the U.S. will be needed to deal with climate change impacts, almost as many say it’s more likely new developments in technology will address most of the problems cause by climate change.

On policy, majorities prioritize the use of renewable energy and back the expanded use of specific sources like wind and solar. Americans offer more support than opposition to a range of policies aimed at reducing the effects of climate change, including key climate-related aspects of President Joe Biden’s recent infrastructure proposal. Still, Americans do not back a complete break with carbon: A majority says oil and gas should still be part of the energy mix in the U.S., and about half oppose phasing out gas-powered vehicles by 2035.

Overall, 64% of U.S. adults say reducing the effects of climate change needs to be “a top priority to ensure a sustainable planet for future generations, even if that means fewer resources for addressing other important problems today.” By contrast, 34% say that reducing the effects of climate change needs to be “a lower priority, with so many other important problems facing Americans today, even if that means more climate problems for future generations.”

There are stark partisan differences over this sentiment. Nearly nine-in-ten Democrats (87%) say efforts to reduce the effects of climate change need to be prioritized today to ensure a sustainable planet. By contrast, 61% of Republicans say that efforts to reduce the effects of climate change need to be a lower priority, with so many other important problems facing Americans today. (Democrats and Republicans include those who lean to each party.)

Asked to look to the future 50 years from now, 51% of Americans say it’s more likely that major changes to everyday life in the U.S. will be needed to address the problems caused by global climate change. By contrast, 46% say it’s more likely that new technology will be able to address most of the problems caused by global climate change.

Most Democrats (69%) expect that in 50 years major lifestyle changes in the U.S. will be needed to address the problems caused by climate change. By contrast, among Republicans, two-thirds (66%) say it’s likelier that new technology will be able to address most climate change problems in the U.S. Among Republicans, this view is widely held (81%) among the majority who do not see climate change as an important personal concern; Republicans who express greater personal concern about climate change are more likely to say major changes to everyday life in the future will be needed to address problems caused by climate change.

Overall, majorities across generations believe that climate change should be a top priority today to ensure a sustainable planet for future generations. Generational divisions are more prominent among Republicans than Democrats, however.

Among Republicans, about half of Gen Zers (49%) and Millennials (48%) give top priority to reducing the effect of climate change today, even if that means fewer resources to deal with other important problems. By contrast, majorities of Gen X (61%) and Baby Boomer and older Republicans (71%) say reducing the effects of climate change needs to a lower priority today, given the other problems Americans are facing.

Generational differences among Democrats on this question are modest, with clear majorities giving priority to dealing with climate change today.

Majority of Americans prioritize developing alternative energy sources, but only a third would phase out all fossil fuels

Burning fossil fuels for electricity and in cars and trucks are among the primary sources of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. Americans broadly favor increasing the use of renewable energy sources, but a majority reject the idea of phasing out fossil fuel energy sources completely. And Americans are about evenly divided on the idea of phasing out the production of new gasoline cars and trucks by 2035.

There are familiar partisan divisions over nearly every aspect of energy policy, particularly when it comes to fossil fuels. Political divides have widened over the past year as Republican support for alternative energy sources – including wind and solar power – has fallen while support for expanding offshore oil drilling, hydraulic fracturing and coal mining has ticked up.

Within both parties, Gen Zers and Millennials are more supportive of proposals to move away from fossil fuels than their older counterparts.

A majority of Americans (71%) continue to say that the U.S. should prioritize developing alternative energy, while a much smaller share (27%) prioritizes expanding the production of oil, coal and natural gas.

The share of Republicans who prioritize developing alternative energy sources over expanding the production of fossil fuels has fallen 18 percentage points in the past year. As a result, Republicans are now closely divided between these two energy priorities. Democrats remain near consensus levels in their support for prioritizing development of alternative energy levels.

Among Republicans, there are significant generational differences in support for increasing the development of renewable energy sources. Majorities of Gen Z (63%) and Millennial (62%) Republicans prioritize increased development of renewable sources, such as wind and solar. Smaller shares of Gen X Republicans (50%) and just 33% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans prioritize this approach over the expanding of fossil fuel development. For more details, including longer-term trends over time, see the Appendix .

Republicans and Democrats also differ over the best way to encourage reliance on renewable energy sources. Most Democrats (81%) continue to see a need for government regulations to increase reliance on renewable energy. On the other hand, two-thirds of Republicans (67%) say the private marketplace alone will be enough. See the Appendix for details.

In keeping with support for prioritizing the development of renewable energy, most Americans favor expanding solar panel farms (84%) and wind turbine farms (77%). By contrast, majorities oppose more coal mining (61%), more hydraulic fracturing (56%) and more offshore oil and gas drilling (55%).

Americans are divided over expanding nuclear power: 50% favor more nuclear power plants, while 47% are opposed.

Republican support for expanding solar power is down 11 points in the last year (from 84% to 73%), and support for wind power has fallen 13 points (from 75% to 62%). Democrats’ widely held support for increasing both energy sources remains largely unchanged.

In addition, there has been an increase since 2020 in the shares of Republicans who support expanding hydraulic fracturing of natural gas (up 10 points), offshore oil and gas drilling (up 6 points) and coal mining (up 6 points). See the Appendix for details.

Even so, younger Republicans remain less likely than their older counterparts to support expanding fossil fuel sources, consistent with past Center surveys.

For instance, 79% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans support more offshore oil and gas drilling, while roughly half (48%) of Gen Z Republicans say the same (a difference of 31 points). There are similar divides over hydraulic fracturing, the primary extraction technique for natural gas (74% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans favor vs. 44% of Gen Z Republicans).

Nearly two-thirds of Americans support using a mix of fossil fuel and renewable energy sources, younger adults more inclined to phase out fossil fuels completely

While a large share of U.S. adults would prioritize alternative energy development over expanding the use of fossil fuels, most adults are not inclined to give up reliance on fossil fuels altogether.

The survey finds 64% of Americans say they support ongoing use of oil, coal and natural gas as well as renewable energy sources, while a third (33%) say the country should phase out the use of fossil fuels completely.

There are sharp differences of opinion about this issue by party. Most Republicans (86%) say that the U.S. should rely on a mix of fossil fuel and renewable energy sources. Democrats are about evenly divided, with 47% in favor of using a mix of sources and 50% calling for a phase out of fossil fuels. About two-thirds of liberal Democrats (65%) support phasing out fossil fuels but fewer moderate and conservative Democrats say the same (39%).

There are also generational divisions on this issue, with younger generations more likely to support giving up fossil fuel use over time. In fact, majorities of Democratic Gen Zers (60%) and Millennials (57%) support phasing out fossil fuel use completely.

Americans are closely divided over phasing out gas-powered vehicles; Democrats, younger adults are more receptive to the idea

Climate advocates point to electric vehicles as a way to cut down on carbon emissions and reduce climate change. Americans are about equally divided on the idea of phasing out production of gasoline cars and trucks by 2035. A little under half (47%) say they would favor such a proposal, while 51% are opposed.

As with other proposals on climate and energy issues, partisans express opposing viewpoints. About two-thirds of Democrats (68%) support phasing out gasoline cars by 2035, while 76% of Republicans oppose this.

Most U.S. adults oppose oil drilling in ANWR but are more divided over Keystone XL decision

The issue of whether or not to allow oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has long been a controversy in energy policy. Overall, most Americans (70%) oppose the idea, while 27% are in favor.

Nearly all Democrats (89%) say they oppose allowing oil and gas drilling in the ANWR. Republicans are about evenly divided, with half in favor of allowing this and 48% opposed.

One of Biden’s  first actions as president  was revoking the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline would have carried oil from Canada into the U.S.

About half of Americans (49%) say canceling the pipeline was the right decision, while 45% say it was the wrong decision.

Most Democrats (78%) say it was the right decision, while most Republicans (80%) say otherwise. See details in the  Appendix .

But there are also generational dynamics in views about gasoline-powered vehicles, with younger adults more supportive than older adults of phasing out gas cars and trucks. Narrow majorities of Gen Zers (56%) and Millennials (57%) support such a proposal, compared with 38% of Baby Boomer and older Americans. This pattern holds within both parties, though sizable partisan divides remain across all generations. See the Appendix for a look at how these generational and partisan divides compare across measures.

The public is broadly familiar with electric vehicles: About nine-in-ten have heard either a lot (30%) or a little (62%) about them. When it comes to first-hand experience, 7% of adults say they currently have an electric or hybrid vehicle; 93% say they do not.

People who say they have heard a lot about electric vehicles are closely divided over the idea of phasing out gas-powered cars and trucks by a margin of 52% in favor to 48% opposed. Not surprisingly, those who currently own an electric or hybrid vehicle are largely in favor of this idea (68% vs. 31% opposed).

Broad public support for a number of policies to address climate change, including some proposed in Biden infrastructure plan

In late March, the Biden administration announced a $2 trillion infrastructure plan with several elements they argue would help reduce the effects of climate change. The new Center survey finds majorities of Americans support a number of proposals to address global climate change, including three specific elements in Biden’s infrastructure plan.

There are sharp partisan divisions over many of these proposals, as expected. In addition, there are concerns, particularly among Democrats, that Biden’s policy proposals will not go far enough in efforts to reduce the effects of climate change.

Majorities of U.S. adults support a range of approaches to address climate change

The new Center survey finds majorities back three specific elements of Biden’s infrastructure plan. More than seven-in-ten Americans (74%) favor a proposed requirement for power companies to use more energy from renewable sources, such as solar and wind, to reduce carbon emissions. A smaller majority – 62% – favors federal spending to build a network of electric vehicle charging stations across the country in order to increase the use of electric cars and trucks.

And 63% of Americans support the idea of raising corporate taxes to pay for more energy efficient buildings and improved roads and bridges, a key funding mechanism in Biden’s infrastructure proposal.

Biden has closely tied his climate-focused infrastructure proposals with economic and job growth. Half of U.S. adults think that the Biden administration’s plan to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure in ways that are aimed at reducing the effects of climate change will help the economy. Three-in-ten think this will hurt the economy, and 18% say it will make no difference.

Americans continue to broadly support a number of longer-standing proposals to reduce the effects of climate change. Nine-in-ten Americans favor planting additional trees to absorb carbon dioxide emissions. About eight-in-ten (81%) favor providing a tax credit for businesses that develop technology that can capture and store carbon emissions before they enter the atmosphere. Both of these ideas were part of a set of policies supported by congressional Republicans last year .

Large majorities of Americans also favor tougher restrictions on power plant carbon emissions (76%), taxing corporations based on the amount of carbon emissions they produce (70%) and tougher fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles and trucks (70%).

54% of Democrats think Biden administration’s climate policies will not go far enough

Three months into the Biden administration, there is no clear consensus over the administration’s approach on climate change. About four-in-ten Americans (41%) think the Biden administration’s policies to reduce the effects of climate change will not go far enough. Roughly three-in-ten (29%) think the Biden administration will go too far, and a similar share (28%) say the administration’s approach will be about right.

Republicans and Democrats have far different expectations for the Biden’s administration policies on climate change. A narrow majority of Democrats and those who lean to the Democratic Party (54%) –including 63% of liberal Democrats – think the administration’s policies will not go far enough to reduce the effects of climate change.

In contrast, six-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say the Biden administration’s policies will go too far, including 74% of conservative Republicans.

There are some generational differences in views on this this issue among Republicans, in line with differences over the importance of addressing climate change. About as many Gen Z Republicans say Biden’s climate policies will not go far enough (35%) as say the policies will go too far (38%). By comparison, a 72% majority of Republicans in the Baby Boomer or older generations think the Biden administration will go too far on climate change.

When it comes to views about proposals aimed at reducing climate change, however, there are few differences of opinion across generations among either party. Yet large differences remain between Republicans and Democrats overall.

Democrats’ views about five proposals aimed at reducing the effects of climate change are uniformly positive. Roughly 85% to 95% of Democrats support each.

Republicans and Republican leaners are most supportive of proposals to absorb carbon emissions by planting large numbers of trees (88%), followed by a proposal to provide a corporate tax credit for carbon-capture technology (73%). A majority of the GOP (58%) favor tougher restrictions on carbon emissions from power plants. About half of Republicans favor taxing corporate carbon emissions (50%) or tougher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks (49%).

There are no divisions within the GOP by generation across these issues, though ideological divides are often sharp. For example, 65% of moderate and liberal Republicans favor tougher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks, compared with 40% of conservative Republicans.

Republicans and Democrats are also deeply divided over climate-focused proposals in the Biden administration’s infrastructure plan.

Large majorities of Democrats favor requiring power companies to use more energy from renewable sources (92%), raising corporate taxes to pay for energy efficient buildings and improved roads (84%) and building a network of electric vehicle charging stations across the country (82%).

About half of Republicans (52%) support requiring power companies to use more energy from renewable sources. There is less support for federal spending to build a nationwide network of electric vehicle charging stations (38%). An equal share of Republicans (38%) support the idea of raising taxes on corporations to pay for more energy efficient buildings and better roads, although more moderates and liberals in the GOP (59%) than conservatives (27%) support this idea.

There is comparatively more support for these proposals among younger Republicans, particularly for federal spending to build electric vehicle charging stations and requirements for power plants to use more renewable sources.

Republicans and Democrats at odds over economic impact of Biden’s infrastructure plan

Democrats are largely optimistic that the Biden administration’s plan to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure in ways aimed at reducing the effects of climate change will help the economy. About eight-in-ten Democrats (78%) say this.

Among Republicans, a majority (59%) thinks this proposed plan will hurt the economy, while only about two-in-ten (18%) say it will help. Conservative Republicans (71%) are especially inclined to say the climate-focused infrastructure proposal will hurt the economy.

Generational differences are largely modest but occur in both parties. Baby Boomer Republicans are the most pessimistic about the plan’s economic impact, while Boomer Democrats are the most optimistic that the plan will help the economy.

What are important considerations to Americans in climate proposals?

When it comes to proposals to reduce the effects of global climate change, protecting the environment for future generations and increasing jobs and economic growth are the top considerations Americans would like to see in policy proposals.

Asked to think about what is important to them in proposals to reduce the effects of climate change, 64% of the public says protecting the quality of the environment for future generations is a very important consideration to them personally; 28% say it’s somewhat important to them and just 6% say it’s not too or not at all important to them.

A majority (60%) also says that increasing job and economic growth is a very important consideration to them personally when it comes to proposals to reduce the effects of climate change.

About half (52%) say keeping consumer costs low is a very important consideration to them personally in climate proposals. Making sure proposals help lower-income communities is seen as a very important consideration by 45% of the public.

About a third (34%) say getting to net-zero carbon emissions as quickly as possible is a very important consideration to them personally. Joe Biden has set a goal for the U.S. to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

Limiting the burden of regulations on businesses is seen as a very important climate policy consideration by 24% of the public – the lowest share who say this across the six items asked in the survey. However, majorities view all six factors, including limiting the regulatory burden on businesses, as at least somewhat important considerations in climate proposals.

Partisans have differing priorities when it comes to climate change proposals. Among Republicans, increasing job and economic growth (65% very important) and keeping consumer costs low (61%) are their top considerations. Among Democrats, protecting the quality of the environment for future generations is their clear top consideration (79% very important), followed by making sure proposals help lower-income communities (59%) and increasing job and economic growth (58%). About half of Democrats (51%) say getting to net-zero carbon emissions as quickly as possible is very important to them.

Public sees actions from businesses, ordinary Americans as insufficient on climate change

Americans see a range of actors as falling short in efforts to help reduce the effects of global climate change. The public is broadly critical of the lack of action from large businesses and the energy industry – but also views elected officials, as well as ordinary Americans, as failing to do their part.

Nearly seven-in-ten adults (69%) say large businesses and corporations are doing too little to help reduce the effects of global climate change, while just 21% say they are doing about the right amount and very few (8%) say they are doing too much to address climate change. Similarly, a majority of the public (62%) says the energy industry is doing too little to help reduce the effects of global climate change.

The public also extends criticism on climate inaction to Americans themselves and the officials they vote into elected office. Overall, 66% say ordinary Americans are doing too little to help reduce the effects of climate change, and 60% say this about their state’s elected officials. A separate question that asks about the actions of the federal government across a range of environmental areas finds that 59% say the federal government is doing too little on climate change.

Americans are less critical of their own individual actions in helping to address climate change: Roughly half (48%) believe they, themselves, are doing about the right amount to help reduce the effects of climate change. Still, almost as many (47%) say they are doing too little to help.

When it comes to the role of environmental advocacy organizations, 48% say they are doing about the right amount to help reduce the effects of climate change, compared with 29% who say they are doing too little and 22% who say they are doing too much.

There are stark partisan differences in views of the role groups and individuals are playing to help reduce the effects of climate change. Large majorities of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say large businesses (85%), ordinary Americans (82%), the energy industry (80%) and their state elected officials (79%) are doing too little to help reduce climate change impacts. By contrast, about half of Republicans and Republican leaners or fewer say these actors are doing too little to address climate change. Republicans are much more likely to say most of these groups are doing about the right amount than to say they are doing too much to address climate change.

Generational differences in views are most pronounced on this question within the GOP. In general, Gen Z and Millennial Republicans are more likely than older Republicans to say groups and individuals are doing too little to help reduce the effects of climate change. For instance, 57% of Gen Z and 59% of Millennial Republicans say large businesses are doing too little to help address climate change, compared with 50% of Gen X Republicans and 43% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans.

A 54% majority of U.S. adults see climate scientists’ role on policy as too limited, though some have doubts about scientists’ understanding

As the Biden administration, Congress and state and local governments debate how best to address climate change, 54% of Americans think climate scientists have too little influence on policy debates about climate change. Smaller shares say climate scientists have about the right amount (22%) or too much (22%) influence on climate policy.

At the same time, Americans appear to have reservations about climate scientists’ expertise and understanding. Only about two-in-ten Americans (18%) say climate scientists understand “very well” the best ways to address climate change. Another 42% say climate scientists understand ways to address climate change “fairly well”; 38% say they understand this not too or not at all well.

Public views of climate scientists’ understanding are more positive, if still generally skeptical, on the fundamentals of whether climate change is occurring (37% say scientists understand this very well) and what causes climate change (28%).

Americans’ overall views about climate scientists’ expertise and understanding of what is happening to the Earth’s climate are similar to 2016, the last time Pew Research Center asked these questions.

In keeping with the wide political divisions over climate policy issues, Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to rate climate scientists’ understanding highly. And these partisan divides have widened since 2016. For example, Democrats are 43 percentage points more likely than Republicans to say climate scientists understand very well whether or not climate change is occurring. This gap was 25 points in 2016. See the Appendix for details.

Similarly, far larger shares of Democrats than Republicans believe climate scientists have too little say in climate debates (77% vs. 27%).

Younger generations are especially likely to think climate scientists have too little say on climate policy debates. However, these generational dynamics occur only within the GOP.

Millennial (38%) and Gen Z (41%) Republicans are more likely than Baby Boomers and older generations of Republicans (18%) to think climate scientists have too little influence on related policy debates. About half of older Republicans (53%) say climate scientists have too much influence in these debates.

Roughly three-quarters to eight-in-ten Democrats across younger and older generations think climate scientists have too little say in climate policy debates.

Majority of Americans continue to say federal government is doing too little to protect key aspects of the environment

When it comes to environmental protection, a majority of Americans continue to see a role for stricter environmental regulations and majorities view the federal government as doing too little across most areas of environmental concern asked about in the survey, such as protecting air quality.

Gen Z and Millennials offer the broadest support for environmental regulations and for more government action to protect specific aspects of the environment.

Partisan gaps over government action to protect the environment remain very large and differences over the value of stricter environmental regulations have widened since last asked in September 2019 during the administration of Donald Trump.

There are generational and partisan differences over value of environmental regulations

Overall, 56% of Americans say that stricter environmental laws are worth the cost, compared with a smaller share (41%) who say they cost too many jobs and hurt the economy.

On balance Gen Z and Millennials are both much more likely to  stricter environmental laws as worth the cost than to say they cost too many jobs and hurt the economy (by 59% to 33% and 63% to 35%, respectively). Gen X and Boomer and older adults also see stricter environmental laws as worth the cost, though by narrower margins.

A large majority of Democrats (81%) believe that stricter environmental laws are worth the cost. By contrast, 71% of Republicans say they cost too many jobs and hurt the economy. Republicans have become much more likely to take a critical view of stricter environmental regulations since September 2019, when 55% said they hurt the economy and cost too many jobs. (For more details on this change over time, see the Appendix ).

Generational differences in views occur primarily within the GOP and not among Democrats. Among Republicans, Gen Z (35%) and Millennials (34%) are more likely than Baby Boomer and older adults (20%) to say stricter environmental laws are worth the cost, though larger shares across cohorts say these regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy. Roughly eight-in-ten Democrats across generations say that stricter environmental laws are worth the cost.

Far more Americans say government is doing too little, rather than too much, on key areas of environmental protection

Consistent with Center surveys over the past few years, majorities of U.S. adults support more government action to address a range of environmental concerns, including air and water quality as well as climate change.

Overall, 63% say the federal government is doing too little to protect the water quality of lakes, rivers and streams. Majorities also say the government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change (59%), protect air quality (59%) and protect animals and their habitats (57%). About half (51%) say the federal government is doing too little to protect open lands in national parks and nature preserves. Across all five items, small shares of the public believe the government is doing too much to address any one of these environmental issues.

There are wide differences in views on these issues by political party, with Democrats much more likely than Republicans to think that government efforts in these areas are insufficient.

While still the predominant viewpoint, the shares of Democrats who say the government is doing too little across these five areas are 6 to 10 percentage points lower than they were in May of 2020, before Joe Biden took office. Republicans’ views on these questions have been largely steady, although the share of Republicans who believe the federal government is doing too little to address climate change is down 5 percentage points, from 35% in May 2020 to 30% today.

Partisan groups remain far apart when it comes to assessment of government action on climate change: 83% of Democrats and Democratic leaners think the government’s efforts are insufficient, vs. 30% of Republicans and GOP leaners, a difference of 53 percentage points. Conservative Republicans stand out on this from their fellow partisans with a moderate or liberal ideology: 19% say the federal government is doing too little to address climate change compared with 49% of moderate or liberal Republicans.

Gen Zers and Millennials are more likely than older Americans to say the government is doing too little to address specific areas of environmental concern, though these divides are driven primarily by differences by generation within the GOP.

About two-thirds of Gen Zers (66%) and Millennials (65%) say the federal government is doing too little to protect air quality, compared with 58% of Gen X and 52% of Baby Boomer and older adults.

Similarly, 68% of Gen Zers and 66% of Millennials say the federal government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change versus 57% of Gen X and 52% of Baby Boomer and older adults.

Among Republicans, Gen Zers and Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomer and older adults to say the federal government is doing too little to address all five of these areas of environmental concern. Majorities of Democrats across generations say the government is doing too little to address these environmental issues.

Add Pew Research Center to your Alexa

Say “Alexa, enable the Pew Research Center flash briefing”

Report Materials

Table of contents, assessing the effects of generation using age-period-cohort analysis, how pew research center will report on generations moving forward, 5 things to keep in mind when you hear about gen z, millennials, boomers and other generations, millennials overtake baby boomers as america’s largest generation, defining generations: where millennials end and generation z begins, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

• Alternative Energy Site Selection and Project Development
• Conservation and Demand Management
• Controlled Goods Program
• Owner’s / Lender’s Engineer
• Regulatory Support
• Utility Engineering and Project Management

• For Large Consumers
• Metering and Power Quality Services
• For Generators
• Get Started

Top 10 Renewable Energy Questions for 2019

This week, we have all of your renewable energy questions, answered. Here are your top 10 questions about renewable energy!

1. What is renewable energy?

Renewable energy, often referred to as clean energy, comes from natural sources or processes that are constantly replenished. For example, sunlight or wind keep shining and blowing, even if their availability depends on time and weather. While renewable energy is often thought of as a new technology, harnessing nature’s power has long been used for heating, transportation, lighting, and more. 1

Non-renewable, or “dirty,” energy includes fossil fuels such as oil, gas, and coal. Non-renewable sources of energy are only available in limited amounts and take a long time to replenish. When we pump gas at the station, we’re using a finite resource refined from crude oil that’s been around since prehistoric times. Non-renewable energy sources are also typically found in specific parts of the world, making them more plentiful in some nations than others. By contrast, every country has access to sunshine and wind. Prioritizing non-renewable energy can also improve national security by reducing a country’s reliance on exports from fossil fuel–rich nations. 1

2. How many different types of renewable energy are there?

The two main sources of renewable energy – or the ones you’ve most likely heard of before – are solar and wind power.

We use solar energy every day, from growing crops on farms to staying warm. Photovoltaic (PV) solar panels are made of solar cells. A cell is a small disk of a semiconductor like silicon. They are attached by wire to a circuit. As light strikes the semiconductor, light is converted into electricity that flows through the circuit. As soon as the light is removed, the solar cell stops producing power 2 .

We can also produce electricity through wind power. A wind turbine turns energy in the wind into electricity using the aerodynamic force created by the rotor blades, which work similarly to an airplane wing or helicopter rotor blade. When the wind flows across the blade, the air pressure on one side of the blade decreases. The difference in air pressure across the two sides of the blade creates both lift and drag. The force of the lift is stronger than the drag and this causes the rotor to spin. The rotor is connected to the generator, either directly (if it’s a direct drive turbine) or through a shaft and a series of gears (a gearbox) that speed up the rotation and allow for a physically smaller generator. This translation of aerodynamic force to rotation of a generator creates electricity. 3

Hydropower, Biomass, Geothermal, and Tidal Energy

Other less ‘mainstream’ sources of renewable energy are hydroelectric power, biomass energy, geothermal energy, and tidal energy.

Like other forms of electricity generation, hydropower uses a turbine to help generate electricity; using the energy of falling or flowing water to turn the blades. The rotating blades spin a generator that converts the mechanical energy of the spinning turbine into electrical energy. 4

Biomass contains stored energy from the sun. Biomass is organic material that comes from plants and animals. When biomass is burned, the chemical energy in biomass is released as heat. It can be burned directly or converted to liquid biofuels or biogas. 5

According to the Geothermal Research Council, geothermal Energy is heat (thermal) derived from the earth (geo). It is the thermal energy contained in the rock and fluid that fills the fractures and pores within the rock of the earth’s crust. Deep wells are drilled into underground reservoirs to tap steam and very hot water. The steam and hot water are then brought to the surface for use in a variety of applications, including electricity generation, direct use, and heating and cooling. 6

Tidal energy is produced by the surge of ocean waters during the rise and fall of tides. For most tidal energy generators, turbines are placed in tidal streams. A tidal stream is a fast-flowing body of water created by tides. A turbine is a machine that takes energy from a flow of fluid. That fluid can be air (wind) or liquid (water). Because water is much more dense than air, tidal energy is more powerful than wind energy. Unlike wind, tides are predictable and stable. Where tidal generators are used, they produce a steady, reliable stream of electricity. 7

3. Which renewable energy source is the best?

Although all of the different forms of renewable energy can be used, the most efficient forms of renewable energy are geothermal, solar, wind, hydroelectricity, and biomass. In the US in 2015, renewable energy accounted for a tenth of the total US energy consumption. Half of this was in the form of electricity. Biomass had the biggest contribution with 50%, followed by hydroelectricity at 26% and wind power at 18%. 8 However, these statistics may show the most efficient forms as such because of the availability and popularity of certain types of renewable energy. The more mainstream renewable energy becomes, and the more it is utilized globally, these statistics will change.

4. Can renewable energy replace fossil fuels?

Michael Klare, PhD, Professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College, stated the following in his Apr. 22, 2015 article titled “The Age of Wind and Solar Is Closer Than You Think” available at the Scientific American website:

“That day will come: the life-changing moment when renewable energy—wind, solar, geothermal and others still in development—replace fossil fuels as the principal source of world energy…

The transition to renewables will be hastened by dramatic improvements in the pricing and performance of such systems. Due to steady increases in the efficiency of wind and solar systems, coupled with the savings achieved through large-scale manufacture, the price of renewables is falling globally…

The transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy will not occur overnight, and it will not escape recurring setbacks. Nevertheless, renewables are likely to replace fossil fuels as the dominant source of electrical power well before mid-century as well as make giant strides in other areas such as transportation.” 13

The short answer is: yes. Renewable energy can and will replace fossil fuels in the future, but it will take time for the world to adjust to reducing their reliance on fossil fuels.

5. How can renewable energy benefit the environment?

This is a fairly straight-forward answer. Unlike fossil fuels such as oil and diesel, renewable energy sources produce no greenhouse gases and do not produce any toxic substances or pollutants that could harm us or the environment. In addition, renewable energy sources are – as the name states – renewable. For example, wind power or solar power cannot be depleted. We can’t run out of wind or sunshine. The same goes for hydropower.

However, there are some disadvantages to certain sources of renewable energy. Wind and solar power require large masses of land to erect wind turbines or solar panels. There are some ways to combat this issue, such as using farmland. Researchers from Oregon State University estimate that installing photovoltaic panels on just one percent of croplands worldwide would be enough to meet allof humanity’s global electricity needs 9 .

6. How does renewable energy save money?

There are a number of ways that renewable energy will save you money. For one, your electricity bill could be lower. Businesses that install solar panels, wind turbines and other forms of renewable energy on their properties and use them to power their operations can meet a significant portion or all of their energy needs. They would also be protected from fluctuations in electricity prices, and could potentially sell their energy back to the grid. When a power outage happens on the main grid, homes and businesses that have renewable energy will not be affected. Renewable energy is also becoming less expensive upfront to buy and install. In the long term, utilizing renewable energy sources either in your home or as a business will save money and reduce the risk of outages. 10

7. Will renewable energy create jobs?

In 2016, the renewable energy sector employed about 9.8 million people, which is a 1.1% increase compared to 2015. Moreover, the solar power industry alone generated twice more workplaces than the coal or oil industry combined. Most of the fossil fuel jobs in extraction or other supportive activities have been declining since 2012 when gas and oil industry reached their peak. Therefore, people are looking for new opportunities and along comes renewable energy registering a 12% faster growth than the US economy.

Today, jobs in clean energy become more available and well-paid because, according to European Defence Fund (EDF), solar energy supply companies are able to offer more jobs per dollar invested. It develops 12 times faster than the whole US economy. The main reason for such growth is the economic indicators. Businesses have realised that sustainable development is key to success, long-term performance, and investment. Besides that, the prices on solar and wind products have dropped—making it more affordable. The Great Powers such as US, China, and Germany are pushing for renewables, which made them launch a plan to reduce the global gas emissions by 40%. It will include building factories generating clean energy that would require creating 430,000 additional jobs.

The increasing investments in the renewable energy sector has the potential to provide more jobs than any other fossil fuel industry. Local businesses and renewable industries will benefit from this change as their income will increase significantly. The benefits of shifting to renewable energy are clear-cut and for this reason the governments should react positively towards the transition to clean energy. 14

8. Will renewable energy sources stop global warming?

Many people disagree over whether or not global warming is real. We are not here to debate that fact; however, we are here to discuss the significant impacts that fossil fuel use has on the environment, and how renewable energy will reduce those harmful effects. Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions act like a blanket, trapping heat, which results in frequent storms, drought, sea level rise, and even extinction of animal species. In the US, 29% of emissions come from the electricity sector. Replacing these fossil fuels with renewable energy sources will reduce the amount of harmful emissions in the atmosphere, and will reduce the risks associated with global warming. Renewable energy sources produce little to no emissions during the manufacturing, installation, operation, and decommission. For example, burning natural gas for electricity releases between 0.6 and 2 pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilowatt-hour; coal emits between 1.4 and 3.5 pounds of CO2E/kWh. On the other hand, wind produces only 0.02 to 0.04 pounds of CO2E/kWh during a life cycle, and solar produces 0.07 to 0.2; geothermal 0.1 to 0.2; and hydroelectric between 0.1 and 0.5. 11

9. What happens if the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing?

The answer to this question is: batteries. When the sun IS shining and the wind IS blowing, solar panels and wind turbines (as well as other renewable sources such as hydropower) produce electricity, and this electricity is stored in large batteries. When solar panels or wind turbines produce more power than we are demanding, the energy gets stored in batteries for later use.

According to GE 12 , a battery energy storage solution offers new application flexibility and unlocks new business value across the energy value chain, from conventional power generation, transmission & distribution, and renewable power, to industrial and commercial sectors. Energy storage supports diverse applications including firming renewable production, stabilizing the electrical grid, controlling energy flow, optimizing asset operation and creating new revenue. Energy storage can help you increase the dispatchability and predictability of renewables, helping to meet strict code and connection permits. 12  

10. How can I use renewable energy?

The following are some top green alternative energy tips that will help you get an idea of how you as an individual can incorporate more renewable energy into your life: 15

• Switch to green power . An increasing number of electricity providers offer renewable alternatives, such as wind and solar power.
• Use solar power. Active solar power is captured through solar cells and can be stored for later or used immediately to provide heat or electricity. You could also use solar power to heat the water for your showers, dishwasher, and laundry by installing a solar hot water system.
• Use geothermal energy. Ground source heat pumps are a way to reduce electricity use for heating and cooling, so its easier to go 100% renewable.
• Replace fossil fuels with biomass/biofuels. You can heat your home using biofuels. You can also use a woodstove or pellet stove.
• Use wind power. It is more expensive up front, but a wind turbine is a 20-year investment that will save you money in the long run.
• Use small-scale hydropower. Micro hydropower can be used, like pumping water to power a generator.
• Start smart. When buying a home, make sure it is well insulated and energy-efficient so you use less electricity.

1 Shinn, Lora. (June 15, 2018). Renewable Energy: The clean facts. Retrieved from nrdc.org: https://www.nrdc.org/stories/renewable-energy-clean-facts

2 Northwestern University. (2019). What are solar panels? Retrieved from qrg.northwestern.edu: http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/power/1-what-are-solar-panels.html

3 Wind Energy Technologies Office. (2019). How Do Wind Turbines Work? Retrieved from energy.gov: https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/how-do-wind-turbines-work

4 Origin Energy Limited. (August 14, 2018). What is hydropower? Retrieved from originenergy.com: https://www.originenergy.com.au/blog/about-energy/what-is-hydropower.html

5 U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2019). Biomass explained. Retrieved from eia.gov: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/biomass/

6 Enbridge Inc. (2019). Geothermal Energy: What is it, where is it, and how do we capture it? Retrieved from enbridge.com: https://www.enbridge.com/energy-matters/energy-school/geothermal

7 National Geographic. (2019). Tidal energy. Retrieved from nationalgeographic.org: https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/tidal-energy/

8 New Jersey Institute of Technology’s Online Master of Science in Electrical Engineering program. (August 2017). The Most Efficient Form of Renewable Energy. Retrieved from borntoengineer.com: https://www.borntoengineer.com/efficient-form-renewable-energy

9 Bard, Susanne. (September 5, 2019). Farmland Is Also Optimal for Solar Power. Retrieved from scientificamerican.com: https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/farmland-is-also-optimal-for-solar-power/

10 Folk, Emily. (February 8, 2019). 10 Ways Renewable Energy Can Save Businesses Money. Retrieved from https://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/emily-folk/10-ways-renewable-energy-can-save-businesses-20190208

11 Union of Concerned Scientists. (December 20, 2017). Benefits of Renewable Energy Use. Retrieved from ucsusa.org: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/benefits-renewable-energy-use

12 GE Renewable Energy. (2019). Why energy storage? Retrieved from ge.com: https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/hybrid/battery-energy-storage

13 Klare, Michael. (April 22, 2015). The Age of Wind and Solar is Closer Than You Think. Retrieved from alternativeenergy.procon.org: https://alternativeenergy.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001244

14 Greenmatch Co. (January 3, 2019). Does Renewable Energy Create Jobs? Retrieved from greenmatch.co.uk: https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/2017/07/does-renewable-energy-create-jobs

15 Copeland, Blythe. (August 1, 2014). Clean power to the people. Retrieved from treehugger.com: https://www.treehugger.com/htgg/how-to-go-green-alternative-energy.html

• Frontiers in Energy Research
• Hydrogen Storage and Production
• Research Topics

Unearthing Potential: Exploring the Frontier of Underground Hydrogen Storage

Total Downloads

Total Views and Downloads

About this Research Topic

The concept of Underground Hydrogen Storage (UHS) emerges as a pivotal solution in the pursuit of efficient energy storage and sustainable utilization of renewable resources. With the increasing global demand for clean energy, hydrogen has gained prominence as a versatile fuel carrier and a means to ...

Keywords : Subsurface energy storage, storage integrity, storage performance, techno-economic assessment, renewable energy integration, experimental method, mathematical modelling, numerical simulation, field study

Important Note : All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

Topic Editors

Topic coordinators, recent articles, submission deadlines, participating journals.

Manuscripts can be submitted to this Research Topic via the following journals:

total views

• Demographics

No records found

total views article views downloads topic views

Top countries

Top referring sites, about frontiers research topics.

With their unique mixes of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author.

• Solar Energy Technologies Office
• Fellowships
• Contact SETO
• Funding Programs
• National Laboratory Research and Funding
• Solar Technical Assistance
• Prizes and Challenges
• Cross-Office Funding Programs
• Concentrating Solar-Thermal Power Basics
• Photovoltaic Technology Basics
• Soft Costs Basics
• Systems Integration Basics
• Concentrating Solar-Thermal Power
• Manufacturing and Competitiveness
• Photovoltaics
• Systems Integration
• Equitable Access to Solar Energy
• Solar Workforce Development
• Solar Energy Research Database
• Solar Energy for Consumers
• Solar Energy for Government Officials
• Solar Energy for Job Seekers
• Solar Energy for Professionals
• Success Stories

The U.S. Department of Energy Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) funds solar energy research and development efforts in seven main categories: photovoltaics, concentrating solar-thermal power, systems integration, soft costs, manufacturing and competitiveness, equitable access to solar energy, and solar workforce development. The R&D projects funded by SETO aim to improve the affordability, performance, and value of solar technologies on the grid. Learn more about SETO’s goals here .

Explore each of the research areas below and the research topics within them. You can also learn about the basics of solar energy  and find solar energy resources .

SETO Research Priorities and Highlights

Various publications from SETO explain the office’s activities, projects, and goals. Explore them below. Additionally, reports resulting from research projects can be found on the  Office of Science and Technical Information (OSTI) website .

• MJC Library & Learning Center
• Research Guides

Renewable Energy

Start learning about your topic, create research questions to focus your topic, using and finding books, recommended books, find articles in library databases, find videos on renewable energy, find web resources, cite your sources, key search words.

Use the words below to search for useful information in books and articles .

• biomass / biofuel
• geo-thermal energy
• green energy
• hydropower / hydroelectricity
• solar power / solar energy
• sustainable energy

Background Reading:

It's important to begin your research learning something about your subject; in fact, you won't be able to create a focused, manageable thesis unless you already know something about your topic.

This step is important so that you will:

• Begin building your core knowledge about your topic
• Be able to put your topic in context
• Create research questions that drive your search for information
• Create a list of search terms that will help you find relevant information
• Know if the information you’re finding is relevant and useful

If you're working from off campus , you'll need to sign in. Once you click on the name of a database, simply enter your student ID (without the W) and your six-digit birth date.

All of these resources are free for MJC students, faculty, & staff. 

• CQ Researcher Online This link opens in a new window This is the resource for finding original, comprehensive reporting and analysis to get background information on issues in the news. It provides overviews of topics related to health, social trends, criminal justice, international affairs, education, the environment, technology, and the economy in America.
• Issues & Controversies This link opens in a new window This is a great database to use when you want to explore different viewpoints on controversial or hot-button issues. It includes reports on more than 800 hot topics in business, politics, government, education, and popular culture. Use the search or browse topics by subject or A to Z.
• Gale eBooks This link opens in a new window Use this database for preliminary reading as you start your research. You'll learn about your topic by reading authoritative topic overviews on a wide variety of subjects.
• Gale In Context: Global Issues This link opens in a new window Use this database when you want to explore your topic from a global perspective or to analyze and understand the most important issues of the modern world with a global awareness. You'll find news, global viewpoints, reference materials, country information, primary source documents, videos, statistics, and more.
• Alternative Energy This 3-volume encyclopedia is available as an eBook. Use the search box to find articles on specific alternative energy topics
• What is renewable energy?
• What are the different types of renewable energy?
• What is the difference between renewable energy and clean energy?
• What is the history of renewable energy in the United States?
• What are the advantages of renewable energy?
• What are the disadvantages of renewable energy?
• What are the economic arguments for and against renewable energy?
• What are the political arguments for and against renewable energy?
• How should research into renewable energy be funded?
• Should the U.S. government provide subsidies or tax breaks to renewable energy companies?
• Based on what I have learned from my research, what do I think about the issue of renewable energy?

Why Use Books:

Use books to read broad overviews and detailed discussions of your topic. You can also use books to find  primary sources , which are often published together in collections.  

Where Do I Find Books?

You'll use the library catalog to search for books, ebooks, articles, and more.  

What if MJC Doesn't Have What I Need?

If you need materials (books, articles, recordings, videos, etc.) that you cannot find in the library catalog , use our  interlibrary loan service .

All of these resources are free for MJC students, faculty, & staff.

If you're working from off campus , you'll need to sign in. Once you click on the name of a database, simply enter your student ID (without the W) and your six-digit birth date.

• GreenFILE This link opens in a new window Well-researched information covering all aspects of human impact to the environment. This collection of scholarly, government and general-interest titles includes content on global warming, green building, pollution, sustainable agriculture, renewable energy, recycling, and more.
• Today's Science This link opens in a new window Covers a full range of current scientific developments.
• Gale Databases This link opens in a new window Search over 35 databases simultaneously that cover almost any topic you need to research at MJC. Gale databases include articles previously published in journals, magazines, newspapers, books, and other media outlets.
• Access World News This link opens in a new window Search the full-text of editions of record for local, regional, and national U.S. newspapers as well as full-text content of key international sources. This is your source for The Modesto Bee from January 1989 to the present. Also includes in-depth special reports and hot topics from around the country. To access The Modesto Bee , limit your search to that publication. more... less... Watch this short video to learn how to find The Modesto Bee .

Find videos and documentaries about renewable energy in Films on Demand.  These film resources are free for MJC students, faculty, & staff.  If you're working from off campus, you'll need to sign in , using your student ID (without the W) and your six-digit birth date.

Type renewable energy  in the search box to access videos on this topic.

• Films on Demand This link opens in a new window Use Films on Demand when you want educational video content. This streaming video collection contains unlimited, 24/7 access to thousands of videos. Teachers can embed videos in Canvas. In addition, there are mobile options for iPad and Android. more... less... Instructions for embedding Films on Demand into Canvas .
• Kanopy This link opens in a new window Kanopy is a video streaming database with a broad selection of over 26,000 documentaries, feature films and training videos from thousands of producers. Instructions for embedding Kanopy into Canvas .

Use Google Scholar to find scholarly literature on the Web:

Browse Featured Web sites:

• Modesto Irrigation District Electrical power and water utility
• MIT Energy Initiative Use the search box or click on the Research and Studies tab to find information on energy from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
• United States Department of Energy The U.S. Department of Energy's site has information on all aspects of energy use and production. Use the search box at the top of the page to access specific information.

Your instructor should tell you which citation style they want you to use. Click on the appropriate link below to learn how to format your paper and cite your sources according to a particular style.

• Chicago Style
• ASA & Other Citation Styles
• Last Updated: Apr 11, 2024 12:22 PM
• URL: https://libguides.mjc.edu/renewable_energy

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 and CC BY-NC 4.0 Licenses .

Print Preview

U.s. department of energy - energy efficiency and renewable energy, alternative fuels data center.

• Printable Version
• Production & Distribution
• Research & Development
• Benefits & Considerations
• Laws & Incentives

Electricity Production and Distribution

All-electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)—collectively referred to as electric vehicles (EVs)—store electricity in batteries to power one or more electric motors. The batteries are charged primarily by plugging in to off-board sources of electricity, produced from natural gas, nuclear energy, coal, wind energy, hydropower, and solar energy.

All-electric vehicles, as well as PHEVs operating in all-electric mode, do not produce tailpipe emissions. However, there are emissions associated with the majority of electricity production in the United States. See the emissions section for more information on local electricity sources and emissions.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, most of the nation's electricity was generated by natural gas, renewable sources, coal, and nuclear energy in 2022. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, hydropower, solar power, biomass, and geothermal. Together, these sources generated about 20% of the country's electricity in 2022 .

To produce electricity, a turbine generator set converts mechanical energy to electrical energy. In the cases of natural gas, coal, nuclear fission, biomass, petroleum, geothermal, and solar thermal, the heat that is produced is used to create steam, which moves the blades of the turbine. In the cases of wind power and hydropower, turbine blades are moved directly by flowing wind and water, respectively. Solar photovoltaic panels convert sunlight directly to electricity using semiconductors.

The amount of energy produced by each source depends on the mix of fuels and energy sources used in your area. To learn more, see the emissions section . Learn more about electricity production from the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration .

Electricity Transmission and Distribution

Electricity in the United States often travels long distances from generating facilities to local distribution substations through a transmission grid of nearly 160,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines. Generating facilities provide power to the grid at low voltage, from 480 volts (V) in small generating facilities to 22 kilovolts (kV) in larger power plants. Once electricity leaves a generating facility, the voltage is increased, or "stepped up," by a transformer (typical ranges of 100 kV to 1,000 kV) to minimize the power losses over long distances. As electricity is transmitted through the grid and arrives in the load areas, the voltage is stepped down by substation transformers (ranges of 70 kV to 4 kV). To prepare for customer interconnection, the voltage is lowered again (residential customers use 120/240 V; commercial and industrial customers typically use 208/120 V, or 480/277 V).

Electric Vehicles and Electricity Infrastructure Capacity

Demand for electricity rises and falls, depending on time of day and time of year. Electricity production, transmission, and distribution capacity must be able to meet demand during times of peak use; but most of the time, the electricity infrastructure is not operating at its full capacity. As a result, EVs are unlikely to require expanded grid capacity.

Although increasing demand associated with charging EVs is not likely to strain much of our existing generation resources, high coincident peaks of EV charging in concentrated locations could strain nearby distribution equipment . According to a U.S. Department of Energy report , planning and forecasting for EVs should include assessments of the micro or distribution circuit level since the impacts and infrastructure investments needed will be highly localized. Advanced grid planning and solutions, such as smart charge management, will be important to ensure existing electrical infrastructure can safely support areas with large increases in demand related to EVs depending on when, where, and at what power level the vehicles are charged.

According to deployment models developed by researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the diversity of household electricity loads and EV loads should allow introduction and growth of the EV market while "smart grid" networks expand. Smart grid networks allow for two-way communication between the utility and its customers, and sensing along transmission lines through smart meters, smart appliances, renewable energy resources, and energy efficient resources. Smart grid networks may provide the capability to monitor and protect residential distribution infrastructure from any negative impacts due to increased vehicle demand for electricity because they promote charging during off-peak periods, and reduce costs to utilities, grid operators, and consumers.

The NREL analysis also demonstrated the potential for synergies between EVs and distributed sources of renewable energy. For example, small-scale renewables, like solar panels on a rooftop, can both provide clean energy for vehicles and reduce demand on distribution infrastructure by generating electricity near the point of use. For utilities to fully realize the benefits of these technologies, smart charge management must be deployed to influence EV charging.

Utilities, vehicle manufacturers, charging equipment manufacturers, and researchers are working to ensure that EVs are smoothly integrated into the U.S. electricity infrastructure. Some utilities offer lower rates at off-peak times to encourage residential vehicle charging when electricity demand is lowest. Vehicles and many types of charging equipment (also known as electric vehicle supply equipment or EVSE) can be programmed to delay charging to off-peak times. "Smart" models are even capable of communicating with the grid, load aggregators , or facility/home owners, enabling them to charge automatically when electricity demand and prices are best; for example when prices are lowest, aligned with local distribution needs (such as temperature constraints), or aligned with renewable generation.

Maps & Data

More Electricity Data | All Maps & Data

Case Studies

• ChargeOK: State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Funding Success Story
• Maryland State Fleet Commits to Zero-Emission Vehicles
• Electric Vehicles in Rural Communities

More Electricity Case Studies | All Case Studies

Publications

• Summary of Best Practices in Electric Vehicle Ordinances
• Vehicle Electrification: Federal and State Issues Affecting Deployment

More Electricity Publications | All Publications

• EVI-X Toolbox
• Electricity Sources and Emissions

116 Renewable Energy Essay Topics

🏆 best essay topics on renewable energy, 🌶️ hot renewable energy essay topics, 👍 good renewable energy research topics & essay examples, 💡 simple renewable energy essay ideas, ❓ renewable energy research questions.

• How Wind Turbines Convert Wind Energy into Electrical Energy?
• Discussion of Renewable Energy Resources
• Siemens Energy: Renewable Energy System
• Solving the Climate Change Crisis by Using Renewable Energy Sources
• Renewable Energy Technology in Egypt
• The Use of Renewable Energy: Advantages and Disadvantages
• Solar Energy and Its Impact on Environment
• Renewable Energy Sources: Popularity and Benefits Renewable fuels are not as pollutive as fossil fuels; they can be reproduced quickly from domestic resources. They became popular because of the decreasing amount of fossil fuels.
• Renewable Energy Usage: Advantages and Disadvantages This treatise attempts to support the statement that there are both advantages and disadvantages to the use of renewable energy with focus on hydroelectric power.
• Wind Energy as an Alternative Source While energy is a must for our survival, wind energy as a seemingly perpetual source of energy is the potential answer to the energy security of our generations to come.
• Renewable Energy in Japan: Clean Energy Transition Renewable energy in Japan became significantly important after the Fukushima Daiichi tsunami that struck Japan in 2011.
• Solar Energy: Advantages and Disadvantages Renewable energy sources are being supported and invested in by governments to instigate a new environment-friendly technology.
• Discussion of Realization of Solar Energy Company ABC is interested in creating a “solar” project which will fully install and staff solar panels to ensure the safe transformation of solar energy into electricity.
• Renewable Energy Sources: Definition, Types and Stocks This research report analyzes the growing interest of the use renewable energy as an alternative to the non-renewable energy.
• Environmental Degradation and Renewable Energy The global community relies on the surrounding environment for food production, transport, and economic development.
• The Concept of Sustainability in Energy Plan for 2030-2040 The paper discusses the concept of sustainability takes a central role in the global discussion and presents of environment safety plan.
• The G20 Countries’ Competitiveness in Renewable Energy Resources “Assessing national renewable energy competitiveness of the G20” by Fang et al. presents an assessment of competitiveness in renewable energy resources among G20 countries.
• Future of 100% Renewable Energy This article explores the future of renewable green energy and a review the topical studies related to 100% renewable energy.
• Full Renewable Energy Plan Feasibility for 2030-2040 This paper argues that green energy in its current state will struggle to meet humanity’s demand and the development of better hybrid, integrated grids is required.
• Profitability of Onshore and Offshore Wind Energy in Australia Undoubtedly, the recent increase in popularity of campaigns to decarbonize the globe proves renewable energy to be a current and future trend globally.
• Renewable Energy: The Use of Fossil Fuel The paper states that having a combination of renewable energy sources is becoming critical in the global effort to reduce the use of fossil fuels.
• Is Nuclear Power Renewable Energy? Renewable energy is obtained from the naturally-occurring elements, implying that it can be easily accessed, cheaply generated, and conveniently supplied to consumers.
• Solar Energy in China and Its Influence on Climate Change The influence of solar energy on climate change has impacted production, the advancement of solar energy has impacted climate change in the geography of China.
• Full Renewable Energy Plan Feasibility: 2030-2040 The paper argues that green energy in its current state will struggle to meet the humanity’s demand and the development of better hybrid, integrated grids is required.
• Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Utilization This paper aims at expounding the effectiveness of renewable energy and the utilization of energy efficiency in regard to climate change.
• Utilization of Solar Energy for Thermal Desalination The following research is set to outline the prospects of utilization of solar energy for thermal desalination technologies.
• A World With 100% Renewable Energy Large corporations, countries, and separate states have already transferred or put a plan into action to transfer to 100% renewable energy in a couple of decades.
• Renewable Energy: Why Do We Need It? Renewable sources of energy such as solar, wind, or hydropower can bring multiple environmental benefits and tackle the problems of climate change and pollution in several ways.
• Renewable Energy Programs in Five Countries Energy production is vital for the drive of the economy. The world at large should diversify the sources to reduce the over-usage of fossil energy that is a threat of depletion.
• Wind Works Ltd.: Wind Energy Development Methodology Wind Works Ltd, as the company, which provides the alternative energy sources, and makes them available for the wide range of the population needs to resort to a particular assessment strategies.
• Solar Power as the Best Source of Energy The concepts of environmental conservation and sustainability have forced many countries and organizations to consider the best strategies or processes for generating electricity.
• Installing Solar Panels to Reduce Energy Costs The purpose of the proposal is to request permission for research to install solar panels to reduce energy costs, which represent a huge part of the company’s expenses.
• Renewable Energy Sources for Saudi Arabia This paper will provide background information on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, its energy resources, and how it may become more modern and efficient.
• Sunburst Renewable Energy Corporation: Business Structuring The proposed Sunburst Renewable Energy Corporation will function on a captivating value statement in product strategy and customer relationships as the core instruments of sustainable operations.
• Renewable Energy: Economic and Health Benefits The US should consider the adoption of renewable sources of energy, because of the high cost of using fossil fuels and expenses related to health problems due to pollution.
• Renewable Energy Systems Group and Toyota Company The application of the Lean Six Sigma to the key company processes, creates prerequisites for stellar success, as the examples of Toyota and the Renewable Energy Systems Group have shown.
• Renewable Energy Systems: Australia’s Electricity
• Accelerating Renewable Energy Electrification and Rural Economic Development With an Innovative Business Model
• Renewable Energy Systems: Role of Grid Connection
• Breaking Barriers Towards Investment in Renewable Energy
• California Dreaming: The Economics of Renewable Energy
• Marine Renewable Energy Clustering in the Mediterranean Sea: The Case of the PELAGOS Project
• Differences Between Fossil Fuel and Renewable Energy
• Addressing the Renewable Energy Financing Gap in Africa to Promote Universal Energy Access: Integrated Renewable Energy Financing in Malawi
• Causality Between Public Policies and Exports of Renewable Energy Technologies
• Achieving the Renewable Energy Target for Jamaica
• Economic Growth and the Transition From Non-renewable to Renewable Energy
• Between Innovation and Industrial Policy: How Washington Succeeds and Fails at Renewable Energy
• Increasing Financial Incentive for Renewable Energy in the Third World
• Does Financial Development Matter for Innovation in Renewable Energy?
• Financing Rural Renewable Energy: A Comparison Between China and India
• Alternative Energy for Renewable Energy Sources
• Low-Carbon Transition: Private Sector Investment in Renewable Energy Projects in Developing Countries
• Effective Renewable Energy Activities in Bangladesh
• China’s Renewable Energy Policy: Commitments and Challenges
• Analyzing the Dynamic Impact of Electricity Futures on Revenue and Risk of Renewable Energy in China
• Driving Energy: The Enactment and Ambitiousness of State Renewable Energy Policy
• Carbon Lock-Out: Advancing Renewable Energy Policy in Europe
• Big Oil vs. Renewable Energy: A Detrimental Conflict With Global Consequences
• Efficient Feed-In-Tariff Policies for Renewable Energy Technologies
• Balancing Cost and Risk: The Treatment of Renewable Energy in Western Utility Resource Plans
• Active and Reactive Power Control for Renewable Energy Generation Engineering
• Mainstreaming New Renewable Energy Technologies
• Carbon Pricing and Innovation of Renewable Energy
• Economic Growth, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Renewable Energy and Globalization
• Figuring What’s Fair: The Cost of Equity Capital for Renewable Energy in Emerging Markets
• Distributed Generation: The Definitive Boost for Renewable Energy in Spain
• Biodiesel From Green Rope and Brown Algae: Future Renewable Energy
• Electricity Supply Security and the Future Role of Renewable Energy Sources in Brazil
• Contracting for Biomass: Supply Chain Strategies for Renewable Energy
• Advanced Education and Training Programs to Support Renewable Energy Investment in Africa
• Domestic Incentive Measures for Renewable Energy With Possible Trade Implications
• Affordable and Clean Renewable Energy
• Catalyzing Investment for Renewable Energy in Developing Countries
• Better Health, Environment, and Economy With Renewable Energy Sources
• Afghanistan Renewable Energy Development Issues and Options
• How Economics Can Change the World With Renewable Energy?
• Are Green Hopes Too Rosy? Employment and Welfare Impacts of Renewable Energy Promotion
• Marketing Strategy for Renewable Energy Development in Indonesia Context Today
• Biomass Residue From Palm Oil Industries is Used as Renewable Energy Fuel in Southeast Asia
• Assessing Renewable Energy Policies in Palestine
• Chinese Renewable Energy Technology Exports: The Role of Policy, Innovation, and Markets
• Business Models for Model Businesses: Lessons From Renewable Energy Entrepreneurs in Developing Countries
• Economic Impacts From the Promotion of Renewable Energy Technologies: The German Experience
• Key Factors and Recommendations for Adopting Renewable Energy Systems by Families and Firms
• Improving the Investment Climate for Renewable Energy
• How Will Renewable Energy Play a Role in Future Economies?
• What Are the Advantages of Renewable Energy?
• What Is the Term for a Renewable Energy Source That Taps Into Heat Produced Deep Below Ground?
• What Are the Basic Problems of Renewable Energy?
• Why Is Solar Energy the Best Resource of Renewable Energy?
• How Can You Make a Potentially Renewable Energy Resource Sustainable?
• What Is a Possible Cost of Using Renewable Energy Resources?
• What Is the Contribution of Renewable Energy Sources to Global Energy Consumption?
• How Do Renewable Energy Resources Work?
• What Is the Most Viable Renewable Energy Source for the US to Invest In?
• Why Isn’t Renewable Energy More Widely Used Than It Is?
• Is Coal Still a Viable Resource Versus Windpower Being Renewable Energy?
• What Is the Difference Between Non-renewable and Renewable Energy?
• Why Is It Necessary to Emphasize Renewable Energy Sources in Order to Achieve a Sustainable Society?
• Is Aluminum an Example of a Renewable Energy Resource?
• What Fraction of Our Energy Currently Comes From Renewable Energy Sources?
• What Are the Disadvantages of Renewable Energy?
• What Would Have to Happen to Completely Abandon Non-renewable Energy Sources?
• Why Are Renewable Energy Better Than Fossil Fuels?
• How Could a Renewable Energy Resource Become Non-renewable?
• How Have Renewable Energy Resources Replaced a Percentage of Fossil Fuels in Different Countries?
• How Can Water Be Used as a Renewable Energy Resource?
• What Is the Most Practical Renewable Energy Source?
• What Steps Are Necessary to Further the Use of Renewable Energy Resources in THE US?
• Why Is Renewable Energy Use Growing?
• What Type of Renewable Energy Should Businesses in Your Region Invest In?
• How Does Renewable Energy Reduce Climate Change?
• Can the Development of Renewable Energy Sources Lead To Increased International Tensions?
• How Do Renewable Energy Resources Affect the Environment?
• Why Have So Many Governments Decided to Subsidize Renewable Energy Initiatives?

Cite this post

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, October 26). 116 Renewable Energy Essay Topics. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/renewable-energy-essay-topics/

"116 Renewable Energy Essay Topics." StudyCorgi , 26 Oct. 2022, studycorgi.com/ideas/renewable-energy-essay-topics/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) '116 Renewable Energy Essay Topics'. 26 October.

1. StudyCorgi . "116 Renewable Energy Essay Topics." October 26, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/renewable-energy-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "116 Renewable Energy Essay Topics." October 26, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/renewable-energy-essay-topics/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "116 Renewable Energy Essay Topics." October 26, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/renewable-energy-essay-topics/.

These essay examples and topics on Renewable Energy were carefully selected by the StudyCorgi editorial team. They meet our highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, and fact accuracy. Please ensure you properly reference the materials if you’re using them to write your assignment.

This essay topic collection was updated on December 28, 2023 .

America’s green manufacturing boom, from EV batteries to solar panel production, isn’t powered by renewable energy − yet

Professor of Environmental Studies, Wellesley College

Disclosure statement

James Morton Turner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

View all partners

Panasonic’s new US$4 billion battery factory in De Soto, Kansas, is designed to be a model of sustainability – it’s an all-electric factory with no need for a smokestack. When finished, it will cover the size of 48 football fields, employ 4,000 people and produce enough advanced batteries to supply half a million electric cars per year.

But there’s a catch, and it’s a big one.

While the factory will run on wind and solar power much of the time, renewables supplied only 34% of the local utility Evergy’s electricity in 2023.

In much of the U.S., fossil fuels still play a key role in meeting power demand. In fact, Evergy has asked permission to extend the life of an old coal-fired power plant to meet growing demand, including from the battery factory.

With my students at Wellesley College, I’ve been tracking the boom in investments in clean energy manufacturing and how those projects – including battery, solar panel and wind turbine manufacturing and their supply chains – map onto the nation’s electricity grid .

The Kansas battery plant highlights the challenges ahead as the U.S. scales up production of clean energy technologies and weans itself off fossil fuels. It also illustrates the potential for this industry to accelerate the transition to renewable energy nationwide.

The clean tech manufacturing boom

Let’s start with some good news.

In the battery sector alone, companies have announced plans to build 44 major factories with the potential to produce enough battery cells to supply more than 10 million electric vehicles per year in 2030.

That is the scale of commitment needed if the U.S. is going to tackle climate change and meet its new auto emissions standards announced in March 2024.

The challenge: These battery factories, and the electric vehicles they equip, are going to require a lot of electricity.

Producing enough battery cells to store 1 kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity – enough for 2 to 4 miles of range in an EV – requires about 30 kWh of manufacturing energy, according to a recent study .

Combining that estimate and our tracking , we project that in 2030, battery manufacturing in the U.S. would require about 30 billion kWh of electricity per year, assuming the factories run on electricity, like the one in Kansas. That equates to about 2% of all U.S. industrial electricity used in 2022.

Battery belt’s huge solar potential

A large number of these plants are planned in a region of the U.S. South dubbed the “ battery belt .” Solar energy potential is high in much of the region, but the power grid makes little use of it .

Our tracking found that three-fourths of the battery manufacturing capacity is locating in states with lower-than-average renewable electricity generation today. And in almost all of those places, more demand will drive higher marginal emissions , because that extra power almost always comes from fossil fuels.

However, we have also been tracking which battery companies are committing to powering their manufacturing operations with renewable electricity, and the data points to a cleaner future.

By our count, half of the batteries will be manufactured at factories that have committed to sourcing at least 50% of their electricity demand from renewables by 2030. Even better, these commitments are concentrated in regions of the U.S. where investments have lagged.

Some companies are already taking action. Tesla is building the world’s largest solar array on the roof of its Texas factory. LG has committed to sourcing 100% renewable solar and hydroelectricity for its new cathode factory in Tennessee. And Panasonic is taking steps to reach net-zero emissions for all of its factories, including the new one in Kansas, by 2030.

More corporate commitments can help strengthen demand for the deployment of wind and solar across the emerging battery belt.

What that means for US electricity demand

Manufacturing all of these batteries and charging all of these electric vehicles is going to put a lot more demand on the power grid. But that isn’t an argument against EVs. Anything that plugs into the grid, whether it is an EV or the factory that manufacturers its batteries, gets cleaner as more renewable energy sources come online.

This transition is already happening. Although natural gas dominates electricity generation, in 2023 renewables supplied more electricity than coal for the first time in U.S. history. The government forecasts that in 2024, 96% of new electricity generating capacity added to the grid would be fossil fuel-free, including batteries. These trends are accelerating, thanks to the incentives for clean energy deployment included in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.

Looking ahead

The big lesson here is that the challenge in Kansas is not the battery factory – it is the increasingly antiquated electricity grid.

As investments in a clean energy future accelerate, America will need to reengineer much of its power grid to run on more and more renewables and, simultaneously, electrify everything from cars to factories to homes.

That means investing in modernizing, expanding and decarbonizing the electric grid is as important as building new factories or shifting to electric cars.

Investments in clean energy manufacturing will play a key role in enabling that transition: Some of the new advanced batteries will be used on the grid, providing backup energy storage for times when renewable energy generation slows or electricity demand is especially high.

In January, Hawaii replaced its last coal-fired power plant with an advanced battery system. It won’t be long before that starts to happen in Tennessee, Texas and Kansas, too.

• Fossil fuels
• Climate change
• Electricity
• Renewable energy
• Clean energy
• Green economy
• Auto industry
• US industry
• battery production
• Electric vehicle batteries
• EV batteries
• EV battery plant
• Electric vehicles (EVs)

Research Fellow – Beyond The Resource Curse

Audience Development Coordinator (fixed-term maternity cover)

Lecturer (Hindi-Urdu)

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

Study shows renewable energy could partially replace diesel fuel to power instruments, provide heat at South Pole

A recent analysis shows that renewable energy could be a viable alternative to diesel fuel for science at the South Pole. The analysis deeply explores the feasibility of replacing part of the energy production at the South Pole with renewable sources.

For almost as long as humans have spent time in Antarctica, the continent has been a home for science. One of the research outposts located there is the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. The science done there includes studies of climate change and cosmology.

Currently, this site exclusively uses nonrenewable energy sources, specifically diesel fuel, to power the instruments and provide warmth for staff. A recent analysis by scientists at U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Argonne National Laboratory and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) shows that renewable energy could be a viable alternative. Their analysis, published in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , explores the feasibility of replacing part of the energy production at the South Pole with renewable sources.

"All of the energy at the South Pole currently is generated by diesel fuel and a generator," said Amy Bender, a physicist in Argonne's High Energy Physics division. "We were asking if it is possible to transition to renewables. This study is the beginning of trying to make that case."

Bender, who has spent time working at the South Pole, is the paper's corresponding author. The analysis illustrates the first steps for how renewable energy sources could be implemented at the South Pole, as well as details of what energy could be generated by these sources and the potential carbon savings that this program could enable.

To begin with, according to Ralph Muehleisen, chief building scientist and group manager for Buildings & Industrial Technologies at Argonne, the team wanted to know if using solar energy sources during the austral summer (November-February) would be feasible as a means of substantially reducing diesel fuel usage at the South Pole.

"Just having diesel as a backup during the summer, you could reduce the carbon footprint," says Muehleisen. "Even if we aren't eliminating the use of diesel completely, being able to avoid having to buy that diesel fuel for the summer cuts back on its use significantly."

Sue Babinec, the program lead for stationary storage at Argonne, described the team's focus on the type of energy storage required to make the project possible. She pointed out that renewable energy needs different energy storage than everyday battery applications such as transportation or consumer electronics. Demands specific to the South Pole make the differences even more stark.

"The types of batteries that you need for power with renewable energy don't just have to last for years, they have to provide energy for a very long period of time," she said. "We did a detailed analysis of what type of battery works best depending on whether you're using either solar or wind or both for power."

"When I got into renewables, no one talked about deploying solar in Alaska or in Canada because it was very expensive and it's not very sunny up there," says Nate Blair, a group manager in the Integrated Applications Center at NREL. "A renewable component, paired with existing diesel generators, provides greater reliability and resilience. If one piece breaks, the other components in the system can help get you through until that can get repaired. We see continuing cost declines for solar and wind and batteries into the future."

To complete their study, the team had to compile a substantial amount of data and then crunch the numbers to see the possibilities. Using NREL's Renewable Energy Integration and Optimization software, they concluded that replacing 95% of the diesel fuel needed to supply 170 kW of power at the South Pole station would save approximately $57 million over 15 years, after an initial investment of $9.7 million.

What's more, the time before the investment would pay itself back through fuel cost savings would be just over two years. These results alone make it clear that the concept of replacing nonrenewable energy sources at the South Pole with renewable ones presents a worthy topic for further discussion.

Implementing any such plan will take considerable effort. That includes getting the equipment across the Southern Ocean, then across hundreds of kilometers of icy tundra to the South Pole. Also, the infrastructure would need to be built to make renewable energy use a reality.

As Muehleisen puts it, "The DOE and universities all over the world have been trying to decarbonize our six continents. They're only starting to reach Antarctica, so we are now truly, for the first time, talking about decarbonizing the world." As he sees it, if we can begin to roll back use of nonrenewable energy sources at the last frontier on Earth, where only a few thousand people live and work at any one time, then there is no reason we can't do it everywhere else.

In addition to Bender, Babinec, Blair and Muehleisen, the paper's authors include Ian Baring-Gould, Xiangkun Li, Dan Olis and Silvana Ovaitt.

More information: Susan Babinec et al, Techno-economic analysis of renewable energy generation at the South Pole, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (2024). DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2023.114274

Provided by Argonne National Laboratory

share this!

April 9, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

Research finds Americans supportive but misinformed about fusion energy's promise

by University of Oklahoma

Research led by Hank Jenkins-Smith, Ph.D., director of the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis at the University of Oklahoma, explores American adults' perceptions of fusion energy. This first-of-its-kind study reveals broad public support from respondents, but their limited knowledge of the technology and frequent misconceptions could pose a challenge to those seeking to develop fusion energy in the U.S.

The paper is published in the journal Fusion Science and Technology .

"Our research questions public perceptions of nuclear fission and whether these opinions could affect the potential for fusion energy to become a major power source for the U.S. electrical grid," he said. "It turns out that these social perspectives are significant and must be addressed by engineers, physicists, and regulatory specialists for this technology to be widely adopted."

Fission energy, or the splitting of atoms, differs from fusion energy, which combines two atoms under extreme heat and pressure. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the fusion process is intrinsically safe. It offers an abundant source of energy with very little greenhouse gas emissions or long-living radioactive waste. The same cannot be said for fission energy.

"We discovered that less than half of all respondents had heard of fusion energy, and many confused fission and fusion," he said. "This confusion, along with pop cultural references of Godzilla or Homer Simpson and memories of spectacular accidents, like those at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Fukushima, cause them to believe that fusion technology is extraordinarily risky."

Based on their research findings, Jenkins-Smith's team determined that the public wants decision-makers to think carefully about the safety constraints and future incentives for fusion energy in America.

"The fusion industry should look at how the fission industry has developed an amazing safety culture. They've built in many layers and processes to reduce the possibility of accidents," he said. "These are things that fusion regulators must develop ahead of time rather than waiting for a disaster to strike and fixing the problem later."

According to Jenkins-Smith, messaging is an important takeaway from this research. He believes there are potential opportunities for misleading statements, leveraged by fusion opponents, to confuse and scare Americans and to undermine public trust for information from technology supporters.

"Because the public is not well-informed, opponents could fairly easily generate false narratives linking fission to fusion and thereby poisoning public acceptance of fusion moving forward," he said.

"To combat this, developers, regulators, and advocacy groups must be aware of and careful about what they say about fusion energy. They must have humility and avoid making overly optimistic claims that will be difficult or impossible to achieve. Doing so will go a long way in retaining societal acceptance of this technology ."

Study respondents currently express high trust for regulators and operators of prospective fusion energy facilities. These positive views of fusion are based, in part, on technological optimism.

"Americans have a propensity to believe that new technologies can help improve their lives. We're technological optimists," he said. "The more technologically optimistic someone is, the more likely they are to support fusion energy . Harnessing this optimism could help grow our economy, tackle climate change, and address international security and energy concerns."

Explore further

Feedback to editors

New computer vision tool can count damaged buildings in crisis zones and accurately estimate bird flock sizes

5 hours ago

Engineers recreate Star Trek's Holodeck using ChatGPT and video game assets

6 hours ago

Engineers quicken the response time for robots to react to human conversation

9 hours ago

Researchers show electrical pulses can control thermal resistance in devices

10 hours ago

New open-source generative machine learning model simulates future energy-climate impacts

Adding a telescopic leg beneath a quadcopter to create a hopping drone

12 hours ago

Tiny AI-trained robots demonstrate remarkable soccer skills

Discovery brings all-solid-state sodium batteries closer to practical use

New 3D-printing method makes printing objects more affordable and eco-friendly

Apr 10, 2024

Why won't some people use a smartphone? And is that difficult?

Related stories.

Scientists in UK set fusion record

Feb 8, 2024

Lab repeats nuclear fusion feat, with higher yield

Aug 7, 2023

Japanese experimental nuclear fusion reactor inaugurated

Dec 1, 2023

Researchers discover two vesicle fusion mechanisms while studying vesicle movement in living cells

Apr 8, 2024

EXPLAINER: Why fusion could be a clean-energy breakthrough

Dec 13, 2022

NIF fusion breakeven claims peer reviewed and verified by multiple teams

Feb 6, 2024

Recommended for you

New quantum material promises up to 190% quantum efficiency in solar cells

Exceptional oxide ion conductivity at lower temperatures offers potential solution for solid-state fuel cells

This device gathers, stores electricity in remote settings

Apr 9, 2024

BESSY II: How pulsed charging enhances the service time of batteries

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Tech Xplore in any form.

Your Privacy

This site uses cookies to assist with navigation, analyse your use of our services, collect data for ads personalisation and provide content from third parties. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use .

E-mail newsletter